Polina Posts XXVIII: The View Of The Modern Period

Source. Note: Emphasis mine.

-Rather than democracy and individualization, the contemporary modern period was represented as bureaucratic and repressive. Rather than a free market or contractual society, modern America became ‘capitalist,’ no longer rational, interdependent, modern, and liberating, but backward, greedy, anarchic, and impoverishing.-

-In American Pastoral,he describes the trajectory of the Levov family as if it were representative of a quintessentially American experience “Three generations. All of them growing. The working. The saving. The success. Three generations in raptures over America. Three generations of becoming one with a people. And now with the fourth it had all come to nothing. The total vandalization of their world” –

– As Alexander so glibly puts it, at various moments between President Kennedy’s assassination and the summer of love, “serious ‘reality problems’ began to intrude on modernization theory in a major way”-

-When Merry Levov, the Swede’s teenaged daughter, blows up the post office in Old Rimrock, she becomes a personification of those changes, exploding the Swede’s imagined utopia and thrusting him, along with the rest of America, “into the fury, the violence, and the desperation of the counterpastoral—into the indigenous American berserk” –

-The first rifts in the postwar consensus became apparent as early as the late-1950s, when the burgeoning Civil Rights movement began to question publicly the hypocrisy of America’s liberal ideology by pressuring Washington to address racial inequality at home or risk sacrificing its self-appointed “moral authority” on the global stage.-

-In The Rise and Decline of Western Liberalism, Anthony Arblaster argues that Vietnam was, in fact, the inevitable result of America’s romantic liberalism, the natural byproduct of President Truman’s announcement in 1947 that “The free peoples of the world look to us for support in maintaining their freedoms.”-

-What Alexander describes as modernization’s move from the sacred to the profane side of historical time is enacted with tragic pathos throughout American Pastoral. When, in the closing sentence of the novel, Zuckerman asks, “What on earth is less reprehensible than the life of the Levovs?” his question laments the destructions of both a family and the American dreams they had appeared to personify.-

-As the embodiment of modernization’s promise, Swede Levov is transformed through the gaze of antimodernization from a hard-working, well-intentioned hero into a “shitty little capitalist,” as Rita Cohen calls him Dawn Levov is likewise metamorphosed from Miss America into a “frivolous, trivial beauty-queen”.-

-In the face of the New Left’s fiery rhetoric and revolutionary behavior, the Swede’s tolerant liberalism makes him an anachronism—as naive and impotent as the Gittelmans had once appeared in the glow of postwar consensus. Roth’s description of the Swede seems to echo the opening paragraphs of “Benito Cereno,” in which Melville famously calls Amasa Delano “a person of a singularly undistrustful good nature”. “How to penetrate to the interior of people was some skill or capacity he did not possess,” Zuckerman says.-

-He just did not have the combination to that lock. Everybody who flashed the signs of goodness he took to be good. Everybody who flashed the signs of loyalty he took to be loyal. Everybody who flashed the signs of intelligence he took to be intelligent. And so he had failed to see into his daughter, failed to see into his wife, failed to see into his one and only mistress—probably had never even begun to see into himself. What was he, stripped of all the signs he flashed? –

-Like Delano, the Swede is undone by his inability to recognize the “malign evil in man,” particularly the failings of his own daughter, whose outrage and anger—like that displayed by Don Cox in Leonard Bernstein’s well-heeled duplex—he greets with apologies and sympathy and (mis)understanding.-

-By the end of the novel, Merry, like her father, is dead, as are the radically divergent dreams of America’s future that each held dear. Merry’s stated objective echoes the Marxist goals of the Weathermen (who she joins), the Panthers, and the other revolutionary arms of the New Left: “To change the system and give power to the 90 percent of the people who have no economic or political control now”. Instead of helping to usher in a new era of political, economic, and social equality, however Merry’s passion seems only to have ended three innocent lives, destroyed her family, and led her toward a life of Jainism, making her the most self-sacrificial of Roth’s many ascetics.-

-The Swede’s final encounters with Merry mirror the young Zuckerman’s with O’Day and Glucksman, though they are all the more tragic for being filtered through a father’s loving desire for his daughter. Reduced to a life of isolation amid a decrepit apartment in which her only possession is the stained pallet on which she sleeps, Merry, the precious daughter of All-American Swede Levov, is “disgusting. His daughter is a human mess stinking of human waste. Her smell is the smell of everything organic breaking down. It is the smell of no coherence. It is the smell of all she’s become”. –

-With the energies of the radical social movements waning by the end of the 1970s, so went the optimism and enthusiasm of many American intellectuals. “Parallels with the 1950s were evident,” Alexander argues. “The collective and heroic narrative of socialism once again had died, and the end of ideology seemed once again to be at hand”. Instead of engaging in struggle toward a better world, social theorists were forced to confrontthe possibility of historical retrogression, which would, of course, signal the final defeat of the Enlightenment project and undermine the very foundations of contemporary intellectual life.-

-Postmodern theorists responded by welcoming this defeat as “an immanent one, a necessity of historical development itself. The heroic ‘grand narratives’ of the left had been made irrelevant by history; they were not actually defeated. Myth could still function. Meaning was preserved”.-

-This problematic relationship between history, meaning, and power has dominated much of postmodern discourse articularly since Jean Lyotard’s proclamation of the “end of meta-narratives” in The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. Another problem of history for the American left, then, is that, like all grand makers of meaning Christianity, Marxism, and empiricism, to name but a few), history is reduced by postmodernization to a multiplicity of texts, each equally incapable of accurately documenting the whole truth.-

-Like antimodernization theory, postmodernism takes as its binary opposition “the modern,” though in slightly different terms Instead of emphasizing the moral and political consequences of modern capitalism, as had the radical social movements before it, postmodernization offers “privacy, diminished expectations, subjectivism, individuality, particularity, and localism” as alternatives to the modern’s stability and universalism.-

-Alexander writes: “While postmodernism, then, is indeed a deflationary narrative vis-a-vis heroic radicalism, the specificity of its historical position means that it must place both heroic (radical) and romantic (liberal) versions of the modern onto the same negative side”. The end result is a near debilitating fatalism regarding the impossibility of totalizing change. Alexander characterizes the condition as “comically agnostic,” an apt description, I think, of much of Roth’s later work.-

-With all of history suddenly exposed as fictional constructs, artists were freed to interrogate it with impunity, making it the stuff of parodic play. In their freedom, however, they also sacrificed recourse to effective political means, making parody easy (and fun), but change difficult.

Continuation here

Polina Posts XXVII: Progressive Women’s Sufferage

-Progressives fought for women’s suffrage to purify the elections using supposedly purer female voters.-

Step back a bit.

The world would be more peaceful if it was run by women Diversity yes.

There you go. Not a fucking thing has changed. Any alterations are semantic.

What did Teddy love to do with Progressivism? Use the military to achieve American goals abroad.
Who keeps calling for fucking war with other countries governments? People think this has changed or that these people aren’t true progressives. All you need to do is dig past the surface bullshit and it’s all still there. At most the wording has changed. Everything else is still the same. All of this is also pretty much review. But I was back at the page and fuck you. Black labour, Green labour, Brown labour.

Tater Tot: Irish Baby

damn I love these things

Polina Posts XXVI: The Hubris of Pathological Charity


You have, through specialized and controlled breeding, created a wheat variant that can grow just about anywhere under almost any conditions.

“Finally”, the social scientist says through a sigh of relief, “Now that they do not need to spend every moment of every day stressed for basic needs, they can truly begin to blossom.”

No longer under the threat of having to live every day one moment at a time, the task is set to hand.

Ich bin der Geist der stets verneint!
Mephistopheles is ever present.

Everyone thinks they’re doing good when doing good.
No one in such…”charity”, ever stop and thinks, “What if I’m wrong?”.
For that reason hell is paved with their actions.

They did not blossom, they did not change. For you taught them that just beyond the waters lies a land so well progressed, it spent money like nothing and worked to take care of them and eliminated an entire daily stress.

The man who solves world hunger burns in unknown hells, for he sends the world down a path of genesis without God.

Without a rebirth.

By this man societies now question practicing self-extinction and unleash hordes from that land because everybody wants to talk about the moral crisis and the next great humanitarian need.

No one wants to talk about the consequences of eliminating hunger from the fastest reproducing place on the planet.

No one wants to talk about men’s folly when they gather the “international community” and command the nations of the world like they were God at the end times, directing all their blind morality and unthinking empathy. Rallying a force unthinking and unseeing. Pretending to know “that power which would do evil constantly and constantly does good.”

Seek to do good like you are God and you will do evil like you are the devil.

Not all good creates good. The necessary evil is greater than the unnecessary good. The man who forgets that burns in unknown hells.

The man who thinks Jesus speaks of physical pains, physical hunger and thirst and not a desire for faith wrapped in a metaphor.
Two men. One man.

P.S. This is why Catholics will burn in hell
Namer of the Papist Namer of the Jew, out.

GN’s notes: Bold emphasis in this is mine, I’m quite sure that’s an original quote by Polina and I think it’s perfect.

Polina boilerplate disclaimer as usual.

Polina Posts XXV: White People Made Research Too Hard


Some of the oldest, most terrible, yet ever present stereotypes it seems were always true. But everybody gets mad because no one can into Individual vs Group dynamics.

-Other conference-goers reportedly called the concept of intellectual diversity “white supremacist bullshit,” while another said “research” is a “colonial, white supremacist, elite process.”- (source)

There are, in fact, very good reasons some civilizations got farther than others. Very good reasons some never existed. You have to admit, if not always true, then turning everything into everything turned everyone into their worst stereotypes.

African: “Ya see, science is racist because white people made research too hard just to keep us colored folks down”.
Now do a favor and remove yourself from personal and emotional context for a moment and reread that. It sounds beyond insane or something a hobo said and probably never happened.
Now understand it is and has been happening.
Understand this is a popular current among the learned of societies.

The nonwhite as a group, for this is the dynamic used, has said of the Whites sciences and progress beyond feudal agricultural society: “Science is a white myth, the scientific method and rationality are lies and ll of this is racist and not real and must be destroyed.”

Many have already been more than willing to make many such concessions. Point being.What you’re seeing is what South Africa went through and is still going through since we told them “Whitey go home”.

“Also you can’t go home. You’re barred. HAHAHA.”

Reminder, Rhodesia was right and warned us.

Reminder that what happened to Rhodesia was basically just a very accelerated affirmative action. Imagine the lesson of WWII in political terms, as is said to be, “Appeasement does not work as it simply enables further appeasement.” seemingly being forgotten and the total opposite being pursued for relations with the Arab and African nations.

Polina Posts: XXIV: Response to When The Nazis Come Marching In

When the Nazis Come Marching In

I never feared the First Amendment until white supremacists came to my hometown.

Also from Foreign Policy*. Do you understand what is going on yet?

For the Framers, the thinking went, free speech was just speech, nothing more and nothing less. The best way to deal with the most appalling speakers would be to ignore them, in the hope that they would go away or drown trying to be heard. That they wouldn’t survive the marketplace of ideas. It’s the same reason we tried to ignore Donald Trump for so long or at least failed to take him seriously. Or so I wrote in 2015. We tried to ignore Steve Bannon and Milo Yiannopoulos. We tried to ignore Ann Coulter and Richard Spencer. We ignored them for so long and for so hard that they now get to ignore us. And these days, people who used to feel free to shout and threaten are emboldened to punch, body-slam, and stab.

Imagine believing that these people were ignored. Imagine believing that ignoring them caused this. Don’t because she doesn’t either

That is what has become of free speech in this country. That is why I was contemplating breaking up with it. I don’t think I’m alone, either. There are a lot of people out there who feel that they ignored racist, xenophobic, sexist white supremacists at their own peril, for months and years, when they should have been punching back. And now, a lot of people in my town are not quite sure what to do.

“Punch a Nazi” apparently did not happen.

-Many progressives are sick and tired because they have found that their attempts to protect free speech-

Has not happens since the 60s.
She goes on to do exactly what many predicted they would do. Remember the self-referencing image? It never existed but someone said it did and now it references itself as proof of existence. Every time a news story that isn’t accurate has been posted by MSM only to be shyly corrected later, is this very concept.
Like the Bernie guy in portland.
He’s still a “White supremacist” but now they mention, without the full details, he attended Free Speech rallies.

I see the lines behind everything and it is driving me back into insanity.

*Why is it a slate link? Re-posted onto FP.


Polina Posts XXIII: Is it Moral to Have Kids In a World Beset

Polina’s response to: Is it moral to have kids in a world beset by overpopulation and global warming?


If this ends in “The people who have the ability to solve these issues must stop breeding” I’m going to look up their religion.

Key note in the article already: Iran began educating women when they wanted to lower fertility rates.
It worked.

  • Trick women into delaying child birth (older means more likely to suffer mental problems)/living without families.
  • Cut the upper crust birth rate
    Now the other person is bitching about patriarchy and instead that Men should be targeted and restricted instead. What men are we talking about?

-Poor women don’t have the luxury of controlling their reproduction.-

“- They’re the ones who are going to be held responsible, and they’re also the ones who are least in a position to live up to these norms.-
No, they really are fucking not this makes no god damned sense. Condoms not expensive, THEY’RE THE ONES HAVING 30 KIDS THAT GO NOWHERE

-Wealthy, white, normative, traditional-looking families are going to get more of a pass.-
You stupid fucking dyke looking bitch I’m looking
Oh gee who fucking guessed it you Jewish bitch

  •  Queer, gender fluid Jew who teaches gay feminist philosophy at a catholic university and openly loathes the religions teachings.


“I know you talking bout babies and shit, but really, like, fuck the patriarchy.”

This conversation has been completely derailed and anytime the other one in it tries to get it back on track the dumb jewish dyke interprets something as oppressing women when poverty somehow makes it impossible to pull out.

Even when he concedes to her to try and get this back on topic she immediately argues the opposite.

This is no longer about kids, the environment, and families. It’s all about in what ways she can find oppression in any statement. Her last statement is that the best solution is to build upwards in the Urban, THE URBAN, and this will be better for the environment.

-people who live in small, active city spaces with tons of possibilities just tend to have fewer children.-
I am surrounded by trillions of little Mexican babies you are full of shit.

Polina Posts XXII: Why You Must Die For The Affluent Liberal


The question of why society must bear the burden of every problem the affluent and decadent and effete bring on it and import. Every single problem that has no positive offset to anyone but them. You know how the left talks about becoming complicit in and defending your oppressors? When what they do offer not benefit to you but you protect it anyway? Well the left has never really liked what it sees in the mirror anyhow. Eventually enough become aware of that question, which then multiplies into many questions.
That multiplication is why kings die.
Why expulsion and purges happen.
Why empires fracture and consolidated into Nation States.

Why the “World City”, diversity, societal fragmentation and wanton sexual degeneracy and all consequences there-in proceeds the fall. Symptoms of weakness and/or an insulated and hedonistic ruling class.

You die so the transient liberal can flaunt his ego in diversity for his transqueer, mixed race, foreign belief system holding puppet “office holder”. Like a fucking cardboard cut out, just there to make him look good.

You die so he can eat ethnic food he knows nothing about and is probably just a poor imitation of a thing he does not know. A traditional cultural aspect.

You die so he can pretend to sample traditions of foreign cultures.

The question of “Why?” rings.
You’ll be at the right place you need to be when you realize that there is no answer.
And that is why it has to end.

Polina Post Boilerplate

Polina Posts XXI: le pilla rosa on bigotry and hate throughout history


When the black judge thinks you being secretly bigoted so he ignores the text of the law entirely.

It’s gunna be like this more and more. And eventually, it IS going to become a racial issue. Because you cannot watch the country itself unravel because “that’s racist” and not hate niggers. Or anything brown or bright of hair.

You want “le pilla rosa” on bigotry and hate throughout history? You want full context and not just “they were racist”? The group that has not exemplified the stereotype, the group that has not deserved the hate 100%, is a marginal.
They all have, no matter who they were. Literally everybody was bigoted and everybody deserved prejudice. That was always the warning of using historical wrongs as justification in the present.

Everyone is actually fully guilty.

You know the white ones, probably by heart now if you went through public education, is there exaggeration? Of course. However does the exaggerated incident really ever matter when the whole of history is in play? When there’s not limit on when or why even?
The only thing that prevents the usage prehistorical record keeping events is that they are prehistorical of kept records.

Jews flat out invented banking.
Jews pretend otherwise but call them on it and they blame Christians oppressing them. In other words, Jews invented banking and only admit to it when forced to.

Take note with your highlighters this will be a common theme.

In the kingdoms of Europe, big Banker Jews were called Court Jews. And yes, they financed war and profited on it. Fuck they financed just about anything that got them a profit. That’s why they were there. In the Court. As the Court Jew. The entire point was the financing.

Why were there wars? Because until the Thirty Years war, Europe looked like a white, rich africa. Then the “barbarism” beat the “barbarism” out of them. [Compliers note, the Catholic church also made looting poor people a big time sin, that helped.]

You know until later anyway. Which was one of major reasons the Americans said “GET OUT”. Because mother fuckers were already waring over the new world. Essentially the condensing of the coast to coast territory into one country was one big “FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF” until shit was secure. During which Europe had forgotten the Thirty Years war aaaaaaaaaaaand you know what happened after that. And the Jews made Cash money BANK. Which they came up with.

Do you even know how fucking old and rich the Rothschilds family is? Rich on blood money enough to disgust the father of Zionism. Yes, they were so Jewish they disgusted Jewish Nationalism.

By the way Israel is totally a Religious and Ethnic State. Until they started taking in black jews. Now they’re falling apart.

By the way that happened with almost every state that encountered Africa. The arabs have been through this hundreds of times. They also tried the religious route and identity route to unite the group.


Yeah social turmoil cost them Moorish Spain. If there are Africans there will be societal turmoil eventually this is how they got the reputation as uncivilized and destructive. Go all the way into the ancient east and GUESS WHAT YOU’LL FIND?

All was quiet in the valley, for hard times had fallen and the people gathered themselves for a low harvest.
Then suddenly.
Deep in what we now know as Iraq, there echoed off the mountains


All went silent




The slave uprising took place and slaughtered it’s way deep into the whole fucking area. That is why there is the “afro-iraqi”
By the way, Old Empires were multicultural and diverse this is not a new thing this is not a modern invention it’s an ancient problem because it always ended in shit like this.

It’s an “Empire”, it conquered land all over the fuck do you think it was? Ah yes, the Roman Empire that stretched all across the Mediterranean and was nothing but ethnic Romans. Oh gee guess what happened when the Romans themselves saw their birth rates drop down?
They free the slaves to tax them.

But what of labor?

They are but refugees fleeing the mongol rape train we can take it.


The empire fucking broke in half.

You see this whole place we call the United States? As a baltice once told me “My door knob is older than your country.”

Yeah this won’t last.
Enjoy that by the way.

Good bye two oceans. Goodbye two borders.

Literally the perfect piece of land mass to avoid conflict. But then a “social scientist” and that faggot Wilson said “You know we should lie about everything, do the opposite, and rule through virtuous bullshitting

Translators note: Social Scientist means Jew.

Bernays was indeed Jewish, even related to “YOU WANT TO FUCK YOUR MUTTER”
IE, Freud.

Because if anyone would come up with a mode of thinking that was all about “disrupt the family unit through SUBVERSIVE DICKINGS and WE ALL RACE TO DEATH ITS LITERALLY ALL WE DO”
It was going to be a Jew.

And if anyone was going to perfect the art of lying to guide and control (Bernays) it would also be a jew.

Why? Let me tell you about “GOD IS LOOPHOLES”
You’re a rabbi in a society where you can’t do much but sit around all day shitposting with other rabbis

If a baby is pushed off a roof and falls onto the sharp end of a sword held by someone how many people do we sue?

That’s Jews. By the way the answer is the land owners Oxen. All of them.
Unless he gored all the other oxen and just happened to bump the child by accident.

You think I’m fucking with you probably but you know I’m nuts and this bullshit is why. Because as it turns out almost everything that would seem too stupid to be true is.

What did I just say there that it is too stupid to be true or that it’s true?


By the way Marx was Jewish and hated Jews and Money.
Someone once called him out on being jewish himself so he declared he was Polish Royalty.

If only you fucking knew you still couldn’t do a damn thing about it.

By the way I said both. So therefore I said neither. Welcome to the Kabalist dialectical.
This was how a Jewish Messiah stayed a Jewish Messiah after converting to Islam because “it proved he really was the Jewish messiah”

What does that mean absolutely fucking nothing and that is the entire point of Jewish dialectics. There’s meaning in what the fuck ever and so we got Hegel who thought that if no one could understand a god damned thing anyone else was saying because each word would have infinitive meanings, that everything would mean everything, that that was some high intellectual shit.

Hegel was a fucking idiot.

Max Stirner of the young Hegelians essentially predicted Post-Modernism from his criticism of Marx and Engels babbling about nothing.
That nothing would fucking exist.
Not really anyway because nothing was nothing.

By the way, yes, the biggest figures in bolshevism were jews.
atheistic Jews
Yes, the biggest figures in Capitalism at the same time then were also Jews

You notice that contradiction? The one that’s also not? Also very central. And the most brilliant method of dodging everything. Do both. Because if you get accused of one thing, point to the other. Vice versa too.
But what if they accuse you of both? That doesn’t even make sense. And now you know why it does.

No though, the whole BLACK the WHITES isn’t about contradiction. Jews just don’t like Europeans because Europe was Powerful and oppressed them and was Christian and Jesus cucked the fuck out of the jews.
“What is all this bullshit about do this exactly this way and that exactly that way lol nigga what’s this got to do with God. lol fuck you dumb son. Faith in the community not some basic ass temple fuck is this.”

But the Jews tolerated it. They thought he was just a proto-talmudist.
Then, he told them money was not God.
So mel gibson filmed the entire thing and time traveled into the future to show the truth
Anyway, yes, Jews did Jesus. The Romans crucified him, but again like before, “teeeechnically” at the behest of perturbed geldshitters.

Literally paid fucking Judas like do you think the Romans gave a fuck about some Jew walking and talking all the time? Jews did. They gave the fuck out of that.

Anyway despite literally everything that was said would happen to them in the Torah if they turned from God happening to them, they’re Jews, you don’t win arguments with Jews. So they waited for the Anti-Christ, literally the Jewish Messiah, , you know because it was the anti to Christ.
Entire point of the term. Anyway they waited and some dumb fuck told them to have orgies and shit and that’s how we got the Great Cuckening of 1666
The Muslims converted said Jew Messiah because he was a little bitch and chose conversion over death for the faith. In other words, he invalidated messiah hood.
And lo did the Muslims laugh for many centuries and the Christians slapped the right hands in the earliest known high five for it is said “it was truly righteous, dude.”
But Constantinople called and ye king had gotten a loan most dank, but with usury most undank, from shecklesberg FOR THE WAR.

The Ottomans just got the Dönmeh to pay for the defense and so the endless cycle continued on through history.
Translators Note: Dönmeh means Degenerate Sabbatean Crypto-Jews.

At some point I pray I slip from exaggerated delivery of information into flat out lying because oh god how can this all be the world.

The Jewish Historian occupy a strange place. Everything he says will be completely true and nobody will believe a fucking word of it. He passes another Jewish Historian, rare in the wild, they nod in silence, knowing each others entire lives. As they move their physical meta-talmuds past each other they both let loose from their lips air so silent it stills God’s dream. They say: “heil fucking hitler”

The sheer contradiction and historical and contextual weight of Jews saying exactly that, two learned jews at that, is such a perfect jew joke causes Jews in multiple universes to laugh so hard as to rupture space time and, in 777 hypercubed alternative universes the laugh against time manifests a shoah in each. The deed is done.

The eternal continues on.


Polina Boilerplate

Polina Posts XX: Welfare State & Guilt


Idealism and guilt. Appeasement of all who claim to be aggrieved. No questions. One hears, one believes, one does.

As far as I can tell, the only thing the welfare state promotes is the continued existence of the welfare state.

Top ten pranks that went way too far.

Article date: 1991

As it notes, “Upper-middle-class-oriented ‘cultural’ liberalism has made it inevitable that presidential campaigns are fought on ‘life-style’ issues rather than gut-bucket stuff like economic security.”

This hasn’t changed much. Stepping back the whole thing seems insane in context. The very nature of the politics and government being shaped by identity politics. The economic issues with mass migration are undeniable. The juxtaposition of Mexicans coming to the US being a bonus but the same people going back to Mexico, by simple way of how many there are and nothing else, hurts Mexico as shown in MSM articles is mockable for showing how easily we’ve all been used.

But the economics of it are subverted by the ideal of identity politics. “This is what the left does, minority issues and unquestioning obedience to party lines” The identity of the left deals little in the way of political issues and more in activism and outside interest disguised as said issues. The outside interest being of no one state in particular but any state and nation that is not the domestic.

That is to say, not “first world, white, and christian.”

The hierarchy of support depends on how many are checked, white being the top issue since it’s the most visible. One of the most pervasive and apologist beliefs in this is the idea that
“Poor is forever poor in the sense that the poor (as a whole) have no personal responsibility for their lives & cannot change their poverty.”

-“Wanton and even disorderly mirth, the pursuit of pleasure to some degree of intemperance [and] the breach of chastity” didn’t necessarily hurt the rich but “the vices of levity are always ruinous to the common people, and a single week’s…dissipation is often sufficient to under a poor workman for ever.”-

-Liberalism’s essential message to slip from sacrifice for the common good to entitlement. –from, “ask not what your country can do for you…” to “You deserve a break today.”-

-Liberalism without virtue leads to self-indulgence and disaster.-

Yea, Ted Kennedy didn’t start that. Not by a long shot. Just another part in it.

Polina Posts XIX: Deconstruction of White Identity


If being secure in ones identity means one is fine with the identity being deconstructed and criticized, why is it racism and antisemitism when it’s done back? When confronted with these kinds of situations, society is introduced as the the explanation. Through this only certain groups can become subject to dehumanization. Because there is no threat to a White Identity. When someone seemed to realize the implied of such an argument, acceleration was applied.   So White Identity, does not exist.  Following decades of Deconstruction that was apparently, no threat to it.

I have doubts.

This is all of course going on the assumption there is no intention here but, there clearly is. Why else would it exist? It’s not a hidden fact either, many a quite open with their desire to do this.
At my best guess, the tipping point comes to hang on the assumption not everyone has this intention.
No shit. Does that matter?

The act has long been institutionalized. In a seat of power. The brain of a nation. So dehumanization and deconstruction of an identity is institutionalized. Apathy can ignore the weight of this.
But it’s still there. Historical precedence is not kind when dehumanization becomes institutional.

Then comes the blurring of the argument and the points to attempt to blur the reality of what’s going on.

“Other group studies exist too.”
“Oh, so you can’t criticize X but you can criticize Y?”
and other arguments that haven’t been made.

There are many ethnic studies classes. Only one deals with deconstruction.

Eventually as you go down the list of reasons as to why others do this among the double standards, you come to the reality of it. The argument doesn’t actually matter. Nothing changes anything. Excuses are made without end.

The core is not pursuit of understanding or discovery. Nothing like that. It’s emotional. It’s wrath and reprisal. This was known when it was begun. This is why anti-nationalists among the radicals were expulsed. They opposed Nationalism in all forms. What remained explained it as the good nationalism, “anti-colonial nationalism”. And other such critical theorist buzzwords.

Every action in this can be easily understood in the terms of the time. White and Non-white. Tolerance became “toleration of non-white ‘oppressed peoples’ reprisals and violence.” for the white. For the non-white, intolerance of white became the core definer of “tolerance”.
See: A Critique of Pure Tolerance, H.M. contribution.

Nationalism became “abhorrent, xenophobic, white supremacist, colonialist, capitalist, etc etc” for the White and was to be opposed. For the nonwhite it was dictated and pride and a healthy expression and assertion of ones place and identity in the world. And one’s claim on things.

Affirmative Action wasn’t sometimes refereed to as a policy of Latino Nationalism in these circles for no reason. Much of today can be understood as Nationalism asserted in Nations where it is Foreign. Not the Nationalism of the Nation but a foreign one. The one of the Nation is suppressed.

Look at the political parties.
They both feel almost identical.
They both preference foreign over native.
Their policies benefit globally.
Sans their home nation.

It’s a politics dictated by a Foreign Nationalism, what is best for this other peoples. You should know what this sounds like because that’s exactly what it is. Colonialism.

What claim to itself does a nation have if it’s politics, the functioning body of it’s own assertion in the world, is about everyone else?

Why do vast swaths of another nations peoples enter it without a care, take from it, and receive protection from seats of power?

Why do the educational centers of the nation scorn the history of the country and focus more and more on foreign peoples pride?

Why is the land of the country being bought and bought by foreign entities? Taken from those here.

Why are so many resources and funds dedicated to foreign nations when the nation itself is being neglected?

What else do you call this?
The United States is not a nation of immigrants it is a colony of the world. We have entirely foreign to us, political affairs playing out inside us. Different councils of nations as political blocks The same is at play in Western Europe.

Lacking the military force and monetary means it turns out didn’t matter. You just had to exploit empathy, immigration, birth rate, and time. With a little help from certain ethnicities who found themselves in power following the end of the last great war.

None of this is hidden.  You don’t have to hide something when you’ve convinced people not to look at it. Hence, why it’s racist or antisemetic for whites to do the same back. Nonwhites who break with this are given pass so long as they do the same to whites. They don’t suffer the same consequences

Look at Farrakhan. Look at what happens when people meet with him.
Nothing.They get a habitual notice and then nothing. You can even disregard most of these elements that remain distasteful to you.
You can’t disregard the effects of institutionalized dehumanization.
You can’t disregard that it’s only applied to one group.
You can disregard my words, but you can’t disregard the thing.
You can disregard the way I represent the reality. You can’t disregard that it is still the reality.

That’s not true. You can. But only for so long. The way this is all framed within it’s own terms without my representations of it remains.

“You may not be interested in the dialectic, but the dialectic is interested in you.”

Polina Boilerplate