Nominating Nominees 2.0

About 7 years ago, I wrote of the various Compromise Candidates that I thought were either better than Neo-Cons or would sufficiently anger enough Whites into Reactionary Politics by any Betrayal of Key Policies.  

Unfortunately, I grossly underestimated how complacent most Whites really were and how little those with Incidental Overlaps of Interests wanted to do with Us.  

I thought Trump had started something he could not control, together with what was indicated about elsewhere.  Sadly, it turned out to be a lot of Jew-Perpetrated Hoaxes or they were made to Suffer for being more Honest than almost anyone else.  

Thus, even though I'd like to give Blake Masters a go at being P.O.T.U.S., after Establishment Republicans Helped Democrats Steal Arizona's Senate Seat from him (and an Establishment Republican was even kicked to the curb, in favour of a Democrat, in Arizona's Gubernatorial Election), though he needed to be someone like Senator Blake Masters, to get there, rather than just Blake Masters, Victim of Systemic Loxism, I shall have to swallow my Dignity (but the vomit shall be aimed at the nearest R.N.C. Official/Gatekeeper) and try (again) to make some sort of Rightward Compromise.  

President: The Orange God-Emperor of The Alt-Lite, Favourite of Fake Right-Populists, Cucker of The Alt-Right, Hater of Racists, Shabbos Goy, King of Inconsistencies but Emperor of Consistent Shilling, Faux-Outsider Extraordinaire, Breaker of Campaign Promises, Compromiser, Lord of Ego, Effeminate Favourite of Beta Males, Employer of Non-Whites, Importer of Mestizoids, Defrauder of Whites, Don of Tower, Butcherer of Names & Words, etc., etc., etc., Donald J. Trump.  

Qualifications: None, really, other than Poll Numbers.  

Allow Me To Explain: "He's not as bad as the literal Serial Killers and Pedophiles." doesn't make much of a "Qualification", though he has implied he will or promised to get back to some earlier implications or promises.  We've seen his True Colours, however, so the Word of a Liar shouldn't sway you.  Some do learn slower than others and Emotional Fixations can be stronger than a Logical Analysis of Empirical Evidence, even with a High I.Q.  

Therefore, let him have another go at it and don't have a Rigged Election; let him get his Second Term and see what he does with it, or let him become some Goyslop to throw into the rest of the R.N.C.'s Dumpster Fire.  

If he can and no one better comes along, in 2028, let him become a Republican Governor.  He could do that forever or until everyone is sick of him.  If you don't put him by a Border State, he can't Amnesty nearly so many but he can still Deport.  

Since Trafficant was Murdered, so he couldn't be President of America and actually start Uncucking it, not that he would have been Ideal, just a Superior Candidate to anyone else with a shot, since the ones better than Trafficant didn't have a snowball's chance in Hell and still don't, lets look at others with a shot at being in Trump's 2024 Cabinet: 

Unfortunately, the only Insider seeming to have become an Outsider is no longer among the Living.  To show you what We did not get, here's what I would have said: 

V.P.: Admiral James Lyons.  

Qualifications: He was a Four Star Admiral, Commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet, Politically Astute, Outspoken and Media-Despised.  

They can't have him Impeached, for anything Federal, without Trump being able to give him a Presidential Pardon.  Otherwise, it'd be up to that Republican Governor or Commission.  If not Republican, thinks could get ugly.  

They can't Impeach Trump, without Lyons becoming P.O.T.U.S. and giving him a Presidential Pardon - if a Federal Indictment.  Otherwise, it'd be like what he currently faces or uglier.  

Basically, it relies on Liberals being more afraid of him than Trump or a Popular Rightist Uprising.  It's like the Pence Meme, only Pence was always a Known Neo-Con and Lyons is a Known Conspiracy Exposer.  

Alternative Nominations: 

Secretary of Defense.  

Qualifications: He's probably more qualified than anyone, especially now that Mad Dog has been Neutered, given the aforesaid.  

Secretary of State: The same Qualifications are applicable, again. 

So, without Nominating Arthur Jones, though you know I would, who is available?  

Since Tom Tancredo, Steve Bannon and Sebastian Gorka were all Sellouts, in 2016 or thereafter, beyond even the Pre-Existing Condition of Shilling, or got Exposed as having one, not previously Public Knowledge, having gone Left of Trump or holding him there, if you think "Trump will come around, without bad advice.", like many still do or pretend to, none should get a second chance.  

Trump had some even worse Cabinet Secretaries and Presidential Advisors, so those need to go.  Sarah Huckabee Sanders couldn't answer simple questions, deflected and waddled off the stage.  Dr. Ben Carson isn't as good as Dr. Ron Paul, though I don't even like Ron Paul.  

If you did have Ron Paul, since he keeps going Left, over the decades or even within one Electoral Cycle, it would be a mistake; he has Betrayed his Racial Policies, which is why he's become an Open Borders Candidate, so how long until he becomes just as Pseudo-Scientific about Sexes or he decides he no longer is Pro-Secession?  

Federal Reserve Chairman: Former Congressman Dr. Ron "End The Fed." Paul.

Qualifications: He is a Fiscal Conservative, Right of Neo-Cons, as an Anti-"Fed" Libertarian, and was the 2012 Republican Primary Winner; it was a Rigged Election, by Romney-Supporting Delegates and other Activists, since he was the Projected Winner Against Obama.  

Tentative Alternative Nomination: Surgeon General.  

Qualifications: He was a Flight Surgeon, Obstetrician and Gynocologist (so any Pseudo-Science is Ideological and not from any Lack of Education).  

Alternative Surgeon General Nomination: Dr. Robert Malone.  

Qualifications: A Nobel Prize Winner, he was first credited as the "Creator of M-RNA Vaccines" but later said to have provided research that made it possible; not creating it, though the other alleged "Creators" are also in dispute.  Sometimes, subsequently, he is referred to as the "Co-Creator" and not the "Creator" of what the same Mainstream Media Outlets have both called "Gene Therapy" and "not a 'gene therapy'."  He demonstrated the effectiveness of various treatments against Wuhan Flu and its Vaccine-Caused Mutations, latter Misleadingly Media-Labeled "Vaccine Breakthrough", which were Media-Denied but even the Media-Beloved C.D.C. and Pfizer have admitted their effectiveness.  

Unfortunately, Fauci blew with the wind but that wind mostly blew Left.  Furthermore, various "Fact-Checkers" missed the forest for the trees or even made up the reports.  

Nominating Malone would be like throwing fuel on the fire of Misplaced Leftist Rage but sometimes, as (even) Thomas Jefferson said, "The Tree of Liberty must be refreshed, from time to time, with the blood of Patriots and Tyrants."  

White House Spokesman: Mark Dice.  

Qualifications: He's an Influential Political YouTuber, alleged (by Leftist Media Outlets) to have "Influenced" millions of Younger Voters to be Trump Supporters.  

Alternative Nominations: 

Kevin Sorbo.

Qualifications: He's a Popular Republican Actor and oozes '90's Nolstalgia, while his Shill Comments cannot erase the Accuracies of his Factual Statements (regarding Jews and Negroes).  

Mel Gibson.

Qualifications: The same as for Kevin Sorbo but far more successful, from 1979, through the Present, despite even more Jew Media Propaganda & (Temporary) Blacklisting.  

Tentative Alternative Nominations: 

Adam "Not-a-Baldwin" Baldwin.  

Qualifications: A Popular Libertarian-Turned-Conservative Actor, though not as Controversial as the other two [or as Liberal (or Neo-Conservative) as his Distant Cousins a.k.a. The Baldwin Brothers].    

Vince Vaughn.

Qualifications: A Popular Libertarian Actor, becoming more Conservative, who was Blacklisted by Jew Media because he did some movies with Mel Gibson.  

James Buchanan.

Qualifications: He was an Advisor to Nixon, Ford and Reagan, won several states, in 1996's Republican Primary, is the Ideological Father of "Archeoconservatism" and Ideological Godfather of "Groypers", was a Popular Columnist and has more "Boomer Appeal" than the others.  

Being as he both once Exposed Jewry's Domination of America to The Conservative Mainstream and later Endorsed Pro-Jew Romney, before Romney went on to be Pro-Queer and Pro-"BLM", rather than Ron Paul, along with having helped along Tancredo, Bannon and Gorka, with the Tancredo having told Trump to be less vocal about Borders, when that was his Main Selling Point and for Good Reasons, Bannon (Temporarily) Popularized (((Alt-Lite Milo))) and Gorka even telling Jew Actress Natalie Portman that "The Holocaust" was more Important than any other Genocide, when even she didn't agree, though she didn't Acknowledge & Condemn Jew-Orchestrated White Genocides, he is a Shill but so are all the others; the Bachananites would say things like "He'd be better, if not under pressure to conform."  

Given the aforsaid Qualifications (and Limitations), either James Buchanan or Ron Paul could be either V.P., Secretary of State, Secretary of Housing & Urban Development, Secretary of Labour, Secretary of Education or most of the Secretaries.  However, those are Tentative Nominations.  

White House Chief of Staff: Trump's Butler (who wanted to Carpet Bomb Furgesson - during False-Pretenses Negroid Rioting - and said Negroes are "animals").  

Qualifications: Similar Duties.  

Reconsidering Japanese Logistical Capabilities

 The Japanese were seemingly never good at Logistics and Military Intelligence; even Worse than the Italians and Germans, in The World Wars.  Some of it is that "It's better to appear incompetent than corrupt."  

Anything since "V.E. Day", like that by Benito Mussolini's Grandson or his Zionist Masters, has been a Deliberate Subversion of Racial Europe e.g. Libyan Hordes Invading Continental Europe.  

Japan could never get its Invasions to work, whenever it wanted China or Korea, without help.  Even then, it didn't always work.  

One could Argue that Pre-W.W.II Japan's Unoccupied Status was because of its Foreign Wars, though only if it had an Existing Threat; if those weren't Invading Japan, any Imperialist Effort only Risked Inciting Enemies.  

Japan was Typically Isolated and Subsequently Unprepared For Foreign Combat, since all it ever had to Fight Domestically were its many Civil Wars, Pirates, other Gangs and Ronin (Ex-Samurai-Turned-Criminals), just like other Countries, until The Mongol Invasion.  It was small, since Mongols were never a Seafaring Superpower, only a Terrestrial Superpower, but had the Advantage of Unincumbered Combat.  Subsequently, Samurai were Retrained to Fight Multiple Opponents and not for only Ritual Combat.  The Second Mongol Invasion was Destroyed by a "Divine Wind"; in Japanese, in Latin Lettering, a "Typhoon".

The Purported  "Discipline" and other "Quality" of Samurai and all therewith Associated are more Works of Fiction than an Historical Fact, as well, as with much of the Lore of "Ninjas" and even the Efficacy of Japanese Martial Arts.

However, the same may be said of all Asiatic Martial Arts.    

There wasn't much else that could be done, in W.W.II, of Consequence, that was Foreseeable, at least, other than Leaving America Alone.  Even Invading Vichi Vietnam was a Short-Lived Mistake; the Vichi later had Japanese Allies Occupying Vietnam, so a French Concession of Vietnam was a Propability of Axis Victory.  

Toyota's "Just In Time" Inventory System was Adopted as an International Standard, which is why that Indian Captain could Sabotage Earth so well, with Evergreen's Evergiven Incident, which had to have been a Deliberate Name for it, rather than "just a coincidence", to Incite Panic, especially after his G.P.S. Data was Confirmed to show he drew a couple of giant Male Genitals, with his ship, before ramming an Empire State Building-Sized shaft into a canal, though that is a Zionist Orchestration and not a Japanese Logistical Mishap. 

If not a Deliberate Japanese Role, it would be an Example of a Naivety of Germanic Caliber or Coerced Multi-Culturalism.  Toyota Notoriously Supplies International Leftist Revolutionaries and its C.E.O. is a Member of its Founding Family, so it is Deliberate and Multi-Generational; not Accidental or a Rogue Administration.  

Reviewing Japan's Pre-Zionist History Offers Insights: 

The Imjin War saw the Eastern Leader as a Traitor, as a Japanese Vassel, with Initial Chinese Backing, yet Japan still was Repelled.  Japan's First Invasion was Unsustained so it Signed a Peace Treaty.  Later, it Reinvaded but it was also a Failed Occupation.  Initially, this was despite Pirates and other Raiders being used as Mercenaries by Japan.  Later, Korea offered a Pardon to the Pirates and Raiders to Switch Sides.  Eventually, China would Allege that it had been "unaware" of The Eastern Leader's Plot being Treason.  China Backed Korea Against Japan, under the (False) Pretense that China had been "tricked" into Invading.  Korea couldn't afford not to play along.  Japan had muskets, too; they weren't that reliable, back then, but they were still an advantage.  The Eastern Leader was Dismissive, saying that the Japanese couldn't hit anything with them.  He was hoping to see as much of Korea's Military get Annihilated as possible, so he could be King of what wouldn't be Ceded to either China or Japan; not having to worry about Uprisings, since any Criminals he didn't Own would be Annihilated by his Regional Superpower Allies.  He didn't count of the Fabled "Turtle Ships" being Commissioned, as these were a Significant Korean Advantage.  Before that, these were just an Idea and the Plans had long been Lost; only Rediscovered during The Imjin War.  

One thing Japan didn't count on is a Monk it Framed being Exonerated; he was able to walk through the Battlefields, chanting, with Rebels being Unwilling to shoot him or even Defecting to him.  

Another thing is that it had Paid Traitors in Japanese Currency, which meant that there was time to Prepare for a Japanese Invasion because a Dead Korean Spy had some of those coins sewed into the hem of her dress; the Japanese had Discovered she was a Spy but not that she had Hidden Evidence.  

There are Accounts of the Germans being Similarly Inept, in The World Wars.  While many are Jew Victimhood Fantasies (e.g. "My grandmother was gassed three times at Dachau."), the German Intellect was too much an Honest Intellect to be Competent Agents of Deception-Based Warfare.   

Jews are Masters of Deception, which is why "lampshades and soap" can be both an Admitted Hoax and a Tax-Financed Hoax.  

The U.K. has, often, the most Shabbos of Goyim.  America is its Understudy.  

Strangely, Japan never tried again but with its own Turtle Ships.  China never did, either.  

Russia would have Colonized Korea and Japan, at least, if not for an Anglo-American "Negotiation" (on Behalf of Japan).  Here, there is a Zionist Component.  

After that, Liberals started saying that Russia "Lost" The Russo-Japanese War and that it "meant" that it "refuted" White Supremacy.  That's when it really caught on, in America, to say that Russians are "Mongoloid" and not "European".  Likewise, The U.K.'s (Conservative-Beloved) Liberal Propagandist Rudyard Kipling Promoted Anti-Russian Drivel.  

Kipling also Promoted "Home Rule" for England but Disparaged Irish Home Rule, while Preaching Miscegenation but Mocking "Foreign" Whites as "Eastern" (e.g. Germanics as "Huns" or Russians as "Tartars").  

Ostensibly, his Anti-Germanicism was because of his Son's Death.  Of course, however, Rudyard Kipling's Son Died Fighting Against Germanics because of a Pre-Existing Bias Against Germanics.

Both Sides of The Russo-Japanese War had German Munitions, though Japanese Industrialism was of more Foreign Origin than Russian Industrialism; the Russians and Germans both having German, English, Scottish and French Ideas, among others, though Russians were ahead of Japan - before and after Industrialism.  

During W.W.II, however, Japan would even Surpass Germany Air Supremacy and Italian Naval Supremacy  - though only briefly.  The Germans and Italians would Regain Supremacy, though the Germans Achieved Supremacy On Both Accounts but the Italians only on Select Accounts of Naval Supremacy.  

Eventually, the three - and many others - would be rather comparable.  Japan Achieved Select Locomotive Supremacy.  Otherwise, it is in a Multi-Way Tie with all European Nations or there is a Supremacy of German, French and Russian.  

Ethnic Japanese, Racial Europeans and Jewry also are the Alternating Masters of Robotics.  

The Russo-Japanese War also saw Jew Financiers, whether those Playing Both Sides or Picking Sides.  Later, these "Banksters" were more Pro-Soviet than Pro-Empire.  Some Financed Both Sides.  

Notably, despite Initial Japanese Denial, Japan Confessed Illegally Disguising Torpedo Ships.  Initially, Japan's Confession was only of the Practice of Deception and not of it being in International Waters.  Later, Japan's Confession was also of it having been in International Waters.  Despite all of that, Japan Denies Starting The Russo-Japanese War.   

Japanese Peasants were even less Analytical than Japanese Officers, with The Incendiary Incident.  

During The Cold War, like Finland and Greece, where Mixes were Typically Leftist and Whites were Typically Rightists, whatever the Odd Exceptions may have been, Japan Remained "Unaligned" with either; having not only Diplomacy but Joint Military Drills.  

Today, Japan has Joint Military Drills with both Russia and America.   

Ostensibly, this was always out of "need"; even "logistical need", despite Aligned Border Nations.  Those, sometimes, also say there is an "alignment of necessity" and not Ideals.  

With Globohomo Vs. Heteronormativity, with an American Flag and a Russian Flag, more and more in focus, converging upon America's Puppet Regime in the Ukraine, will Japan show the Exceptional Logistical Awareness of W.W.I and only "Autumn Farm" (as Mussolini did, in France)?  That is why it was Allied-Awarded Territories.  If not, will it Sabotage Supposed Allies e.g. Pearl Harbor Sabotaging Germany?  Will it be more "Pro-American" or "Pro-Russian", and for how long will it Sustain Alliance?  

Clancy the Lackey

 Ever read books by an author a long time ago, remember liking them so much that you check out the longest one you can find, and quickly realize he's actually insufferable?

I used to breeze through a Tom Clancy novel, in a couple of days, between coursework finished early and the next assignment, or between homework and (in retrospect) bad television, but finishing this "The Bear and The Dragon" is not enjoyable. I should be paid for every chapter, if not sooner.

He managed to take a perfectly good idea and waste it, spending as much time as possible pushing angles once regarded as Liberal and not being much of a writer. The fact that many are even worse, in one way or a multitude, is less of a praise of Tom and more of a criticism of others. How can a book be so lengthy yet so lacking in effort? It's as if these books were generated by machines, rather than a Human. Perhaps "liability" and marketing data determined his belief system, rather than life experiences and demographic data.

I've noticed that many writers have declined in quality, both print, stage and screen, with the newcomers mostly no better or even worse, with those of more talent largely wasting it or not in the mainstream, not coincidentally, as in other professions, which indicates that the craft mattered less - thereto - than the profit.

Why, then, did those ever bother making something complex - especially with the various risks involved in many film productions? If not that there had been a fondness that was lost, as if in a state of depression or neurosis, from duress, perhaps, be it physical, financial, reputational or a combination thereof, whether the subject of the blackmail is truth or fiction, it's that the audiences used to be smarter and/or differently principled; more overtures had to be made, when less deviation from the norm was tolerated. Now, it is the subversion that is the rule; the old rule now deemed subversive. Subversion of narrative now does not merely defy expectations, with coherence, but defies the quality the narrative could have had and does so with subversion of once-valued concepts.

We do not need content that is enjoyed despite it's various flaws, when these flaws are avoidable (and often easily so) by the producers or relying upon the ignorance of the consumers. We need content that holds up to scrutiny by an informed audience.

They once made everything as if for children, when children were assumed to be stupid because the education was oriented around producing efficient workers, rather than innovators and deductive reasoners, as any questions that were allowed were aimed at disestablishing any structure - conceptual or material - that hindered the fiscal growth and adulation of The Oligarchy, whether the system were called Capitalist, Socialist or Communist, with Anarchy arising only where The Oligarchy could fill the void, rather than being a transitional period between The Oligarchy and its replacement, be it another oligarchy or otherwise, rather than dismantling said mind-numbing or warping oligarchy, before allowing more mature but at least equally propagandistic forms of entertainment to arise; more serving than challenging The Oligarchy, when bothering to do the latter. Now, it is returning to producing for a childish audience; the only difference being that neither the audience nor producers are as White as in prior decades - the main result and intention of said propagandists.

One may say that none of this is the adulthood of cinema, which may be said to be "Occult Forces" (an exposé of such) and other Dissident Media (i.e. that for which Systemic Media has condemnation; not for differences in terminology, leaders or other methodologies, but due to opposing ends).

Murdering Jean Mamy but not executing those producing now-refuted (if not also then-refuted) propaganda, after W.W.II, clearly indicates the nature of the bias.

Even a Confederate Sympathizer production receives more leeway than one challenging certain "Sacred Cows", with even Miscegenators once willing to profit off easily-manipulated Southerners, though not those bold enough to dare even think "I'd rather be speaking German.", as if even necessarily required of anyone not a diplomat or a downside, which is why you could have "Gods & Generals" but not "Jud Süß" in theaters. Every "Gettysburg" is outnumbered many works of fiction - often presented as if "factual" or "representative of facts" - that serve as propaganda for a war that *purportedly* ended decades ago. Rather, it changed some of its circumstances. Even "Babes in Toyland" got edited, so as to remove certain allusions and literally march to a different tune.

Thoughts on shooting (((Yourself))) in the foot

When Communism was Invented by Rabbis Moses Hess and Karl Marx, it was Jewish.  Engels was brought in to soften up the Gentiles, as he never Publicly Identified as a Jew.

When Lenin came to power, 97% of his Politburo was Jewish.  When he finally died, presumably due to complications from when a Jewess shot him for not having her particular form of Socialism, his Politburo was maybe as low as 82% Jewish but generally not said to be higher than 86% Jewish.

That's when Stalin and Rykov took over.  Rykov was done away with by Stalin.  Stalin brought it down to about 6% Jewish, officially, though it may have been higher; many Jews, both Communists and otherwise, in high positions or not, are not honest about Ancestries.

Later still, it's said to have decreased to 4%.

I'd also like to note that both the Trotskyites, Leninists, Stalinists and Destalinists did horrible things to Gentiles, as well; especially to Whites, albeit Stalin did sometimes do things to Central Asiatics - even though mostly just collateral damage (whilst targeting Whites in that area).

Jews have always more supported Communism from afar than preferred living under it, especially when it threatened to take away the preferable treatment it often gave Them.  It's Stalinism that Jews ostensibly are the most divided about, however, since it's between how much he helped Them overall and the relative spanking he also gave Them; mostly after he realized both Jewry's and his life were on the line for a myriad of Atrocities, while Jews seemed to think They still had enough "Western" Allies to help keep up The Iron Curtain.

This led to the Soviet Propaganda of "incompatibility between Socialism and Zionism", even though Theodor Herzl - Zionism's Founder - was an Avowed Socialist and Marxist Activist.  Besides, Soviet Spies and Zionist Spies were often one and the same; both alleging the other were "corrupting", while not addressing the Common(/Jewish Supremacist) Origins - from which neither had sufficiently deviated.  Both so-called "National Bolshevism" and so-called "Right-Wing Zionism" were still more Left-Wing than not; when not also in promise, in practice.

Thus, some of the ostensible conflicts in The Middle East were diversions; the current Invading Hordes being among the outcomes of Zio-Socialist Conspiracies - both by Soviets and N.A.T.O.  However, it should still be noted that legitimate changes - though slowly and sometimes over-stated by "National Bolsheviks" and Collaborators therewith - were occurring within The Soviet Union.

General Remer talked about Reunifying Germany and having it enter a German-Soviet Alliance, suggesting German Labour being hired to build new Soviet infrastructure, paying off all of Germany's debts, in exchange for Anti-N.A.T.O. and Anti-Zionist Policies, which theoretically could have worked, if Soviets suddenly kept deals with Racial Europeans, though that's a dubious pretense, though he overstated the extent of Nationalistic Reforms and understated Non-White Influence - including Jewish.  It should also be noted that while his critiques of Zionism and N.A.T.O. would generally be accurate, the Apparthied White Governments of Africa and (sometimes, even White) South American Juntas were preferable to White Interests over (often Non-White) Communists.  Theoretically, a German-Soviet Alliance could have changed these relationships - if through a (possibly brief, though probably protracted) period of Intercontinental Wars (however much as Proxy Wars, given N.A.T.O.) - but Jewry's Internationalism makes that unlikely. 

I suspect Putin would have been open to a deal like that, even if only whilst playing both sides, as he often has and sometimes still does, but he wasn't high enough up the ladder to do it himself; he would have merely been worked into the new fold, presumably, if not among those Conspirators.

Remer, regardless, stated the deal fell through because his Soviet Counterparts weren't willing - unless more in "The West" thought as he did.  While he somewhat had Reagan, in Africa and South America, Reagan was Liberalizing in America and preferred Zio-Jihadis to Soviets in The Middle East; two sides of the same shekel, so long as no one like Remer could Assassinate Jew Andropov and install at least a Kislyak.

For the sake of accuracy, I'll note that it's not known (except to any Surviving Conspirators) whether or not Kislyak was a Conspirator; he's merely an Ex-Soviet and Russian Federation Ambassador seemingly open to such, at least because he was seen in "The West" as a Moderate within The Soviet Union but is basically a Putinist now.

Notably, when "Liberalism" became a Synonym of "Communism", both started marketing as "Progressive".  "Progressives" of old were made Pariahs or Assassinated, since these now were both more Scientific, Logical and Compassionate than either Jewed "Right" or Jewed Left.  It is like how "Staunch Conservativism" in The South in The '50's often meant the Inverse of Modern "Conservativism", which is not to say it meant "Leftism" but that Modern "Conservativism" is a Closet Leftism.

I would say America's Republicans (being of Radical Leftist Origins, though Feigned Moderation, albeit later Dixiecrat Infiltrated and mostly Leftist Abandoned - before being Modern Democrat Infiltrated) became more Trotskyite in The Middle East (being more Zionist, most of the time; Modern Democrat Obama effectively having been more Zionist, at least from 2011) and more Stalinist Domestically (being not as for any "New Soviet Man" as Modern Democrats, though not entirely Anti-Mongrelist, most of the time; Earl Warren being an Infamous Modern Republican Mongrelist), with its Anti-Communism (first Abandoned Domestically, then in Europe and then elsewhere) since Subverted by its Cult of Compromise, whereas Modern Democrats became more Stalinist in The Middle East (still being more Zionist than not, at least, though not always admitting it) and more Trotskyite where there are Whites (with Modern Democrats being Mongrelists and other Degenerates, enabled by Republican Compromises).

Trump promised to change this, to varying extents, though he more sold out than helped Whites; even now, the good things to come - in the short term - from Wuhan Flu are Jew-Countered by a Plan of Subversion to which he has already caved.  He's more of a Libertarian than a Nationalist, though Libertarians vary enough in which are the preferred Hypocrisies that it's difficult to get any two to agree for more than five minutes of serious discussion.

If you check, you'll see I repeatedly warned about both Jew Adam Kokesh, Ron Paul and Donald Trump; being glad support of the former basically disappeared, disappointed Pro-Whites never got to test whether the Cult of Paul would actually allow Pro-White Secession or what that Civil War would look like, and settling for trying to use Trump as much as possible - while trying to limit his Leftisms as much as possible.

Related to both of these, to varying extents, whatever the degree of dissimilarity, would be Lolberts; sometimes merging into Right-Fascists and sometimes Left-Fascists, with Fascists having spanned almost the entire Political Spectrum - since W.W.II.

Libertarians are far more Communistic than Anti-Communistic, though few will admit that and even fewer will try to change to something more reasonable.

There's also a development, as often observed in Former Soviet Regimes, to one extent or another, that's more-or-less an Inverted Libertarianism; more Socially Conservative or even Nationalistic, with Liberal or even Communistic Economic Policies.  Flawed, though often less so than Libertarianism.

There is some Inverted Libertarianism, among "Middle American Radicals"; some more Libertarian, some more Early Reaganite, some more Late Reaganite or otherwise Blue Dog a.k.a. Reagan Democrat, and some more Reactionary - though not yet fully cognizant of their leanings.  Trump offers an "Alt-Lite" approach to this, which is to say he was Jewry's Plant from the beginning. 

Benito Mussolini started out so Leftist, as he was raised, even having Mestizo Socialist Revolutionary Benito Jaurez as his Namesake, that Lenin called him "Western Europe's Only True Marxist".  Realizing he couldn't win either a believable election or a Civil War that way, he turned more to Centrism.  Hitler was moving more to The Right, so Mussolini had to move with him.  This is how he became "Far-Right", though some of it is just The Allies kept Slippery Sloping Left. 

One question is, though, for Our Future: What will follow Trump and how will Putin react to it?

Thoughts on Tarrant

I think he's an actor, but this may just backfire and make him as legitimate (in usefulness to Us, rather than intent) as the opening of his manifesto (and he's correct: "It's the birthrates."). Here's my reasoning: Yes, he did admit to trying to incite a(n ostensibly Second Amendment-based) Civil War in America that - inevitably - develops along Racial Lines. Neo-Cons will refer to this as the situation "devolving", and will do so into Oblivion. This is Social Evolution. Yes, it is also Regression. Evolution is not always unidirectional. We must Regress, for We are about to Progress off a cliff. It's a "Nuclear Option"; he's forcing Whites to come to terms with the inevitable, since We aren't doing Our Part in this Racial War while able to imagine that's not really what this is. Most of Our Race is content to die, so long as White Genocide is called "legal" by those waging it. We Goyim are rather retarded, that way. Put a gun to someone's face, and another in their hands, though, and more will turn into Racists than would like to admit. If America goes down, the world just might sort itself out. America already tried voting this away; it got Trump, and he demanded the death penalty for Racists. Tarrant does a lot of suspicious things, and I could have sworn there were fake moments in that video (for instance, didn't he shoot out that windshield? Why didn't it break, whilst the window he shot next did?), but each has an interpretation that could work for Us; it only works against Us, if someone wants to play pretend that We are, somehow, "in the wrong." Most will so pretend, but We don't need a majority of Whites on Our Side (yet, anyway; those will come, if only out of Dread that We will Exterminate Race Traitors); only 15% - the number Statistically Sufficient for a Successful Uprising. After that, those afforded the White Privilege of being Alive - despite not having helped Us make that an enduring possibility for Our Race (the ones having done so, having a White Right) - will fall in line. Have more like Tarrant is supposed to be; so many more, indeed. Have an Environmentally-Aware National Socialism. Have, in the short-term, at least, an N.S.-Ba'athist Alliance (since there's no evidence he considers himself to have "Returned", the talk of a Shi'a Muslim hotel owner helping him set up an attack on Sunnis - if not explaining that Tarrant's Roleplay Character is not an Islamic Convert/Race-Traitor - is just Misdirection). Breed a White Resistance to White Genocide. Just do it for real; Tarrant, thus far, seems only to have played pretend.

Hypothetical Canadian-American War

Bring in lots of Gaelic, French, English and Scandinavian Refugees? Yes, please! Oh, but wait; these are Liberals - Race Traitors! Better conduct an ideological litmus test, for entry; a reversal of what The Allies used on the German Refugees from Bolshevik Rape-Murder Hordes. There will be a few problems, though: A., Trump may love the faggots too much to go up against another fag-promoter. B., America tried that. Repeatedly. First time on Canadian soil, the general got shot in the eye - the first base he encountered. Next time, the army retreated from the battlefield. Then, America and the "British" (combined Anglo-Gaelic forces, chiefly, with some Mongrels, and a combination of Whites and Mongrels in key positions) needed Canadian aid on numerous occasions in both World Wars; this does not suggest it will be easy - if possible. Even on American soil, America has mixed results with Canada; the greatest successes on either side were partially or wholly due to Amerimongoloids slaughtering mostly civilians in remote areas. Yes, Canada has seriously declined from when it would break alliances over such unauthorized cruelty but so has America; even if America's military is better-established, it will not know the terrain as well and will have to (again, using W.W.II as an example; presenting a problem, since Canadians formed half this unit) assemble a special forces unit of Appalachian and Rocky Mountain residents (basically, the "Hillbillies" were the ones sent to take an Austrian hill that previously was lined with the corpses of numerous American squads). There are probably more "snowbirds" in America than Americans in Canada, too, presenting a problem of spies already familiar with the area and expected to be there; there would have to be internment camps. Now, if America and Russia were to get together . . . "The E.U." and rest of "The U.N." would declare an alliance with Canada, but some of those would secede while Russia severed 80% of the oil supply to "The E.U." - just by refusing to supply it. It may also capture or destroy other lines. Meanwhile, the rest of the world would have the problem that America's allies and Russia's allies often border each other. Some are officially allies of both, further complicating matters; these picking one, may change which others affiliate with or to what extent. Mexico would cause a lot of problems for America; while America has historically been able to beat it in battles, sometimes even outnumbered, with comparable weaponry, suggesting it would be comparatively easy with modern forces, this line of thinking crumbles when one realizes how poorly America operates against (increasingly Jihadist-linked) cartels. Of course, one could argue this is only because America profits from this sham war; even allowing its media to spread pro-drug and anti-government propaganda. That very argument, however, indicates that - if America did attempt any significant efforts against the aforesaid - a Deep State/Shadow Government would undermine it. Of course, it should have knowledge of which these are; these should be quickly dispatched. It would be used as Anti-American propaganda, but Americans could turn it right back as a propaganda of the deed; "Canada was fine with a corrupt America, but complains of America's improvement." Remember that Mexicans are going to need far more internment camps than Canadians, if America isn't up to fighting this as a Racial War. You'll need a good supply of delousing agents, fuel, medicine and ammunition, and you're going to get accused of a "Holocaust" - especially when the enemies bomb your supply lines. There will be Revolutionaries, all over America; the large Liberal factions in The South will transform it into something more like South Africa, if not Haiti, though Texas something more like Paraguay, and Liberal cities will mobilize against Conservative rural areas everywhere else. The Alt-Right and anything Right of it, better step up the game; not hiding in the mountains or rural zones, and not trying to capture cities that will crush these with a combination of militarized police, regular police, plain-clothes officers and federal agents, federal raids, "National Guards" commanded by Leftists and all of those cooperating with packs of feral Alienists, but persistently harassing supply lines and small detachments with ever-changing tactics. Russia's going to encounter similar concerns, and has to operate in many more theaters that will have some degree of overlap; that's a lot of intelligence gathering, counter-intelligence disseminating, border patrolling, special-purpose outfitting and discerning of what is "Need To Know" from what is "Higher Purpose Classification", when in cases of cross-jurisdiction. History does suggest that formal armies will fall to this combination, rather quickly, however, though enemy engagements will persist for many years later and have wide-reaching cultural impacts. Many of said cells will be poorly organized and poorly-outfitted, but history also demonstrates that such cells may be quickly transformed into significant forces by foreign operatives; America and Russia will also have to back dissidents in foreign countries, as well as Patriotic or Nationalistic organizations Right of official policy - or (better yet) just shift official policy Right. Meanwhile, the "Israeli's" would have the risk of 80% of Their own ability to receive oil being severed by Russia; just by nature of Russia not supplying it. It may attack other lines, as well. They'd have to swear loyalty to a Russo-American Alliance, but would milk Trump for all They could get from him; Putin would capitulate, if he thought to not do so would mean America would switch sides. If Canada weren't willing to allow America to do so, Russia would easily destroy an America besieged by both Canada and Mexico. Canada would presumably be eager to accept any American efforts to appease Jews by switching sides. That said, the "Israelis" would suddenly be besieged by a combination of Iran, Syria, Lebanon and the latter's Hezbollah party/militia. Yes, there are others that would come to the call of Jewry but these aren't even capable of toppling Syria in a multi-national proxy war; if it were proven not to be so, accusations of deliberately generating Mongrel Hordes would grow profoundly. Far-Right organizations would rise and cooperate, at unprecedented rates and to unprecedented levels. The Jews' best bet would be to moderate, and there would be those suspicious of this purported change in behavior. South and Central America would become involved in this, in various ways, and so The Caribbean, as well as Africa and the parts of Asia not previously mentioned. Australia, New Zealand and many small islands would be caught up in it, one way or another. Both sides would have those claiming to be "Fighting The Jews", but "Right Sector" is widely-recognized as a false flag and Russia widely recognized as having arrested more Jewish oligarchs and (often-pedophilic) sex-slavers than any other country. It would be W.W.III, but a Russo-American Alliance would end it in a few years and with far fewer casualties than a Russo-American Conflict. Afterwards, it would be rather Authoritarian but there'd be a dramatic reduction in crime and dramatic improvements in education, medicine, food quality, productivity, economics and numerous other matters. Besides, the problematic parts of Authoritarianism are Left-Wing; these would be gone, and government may be strict without necessarily being large. So, I'll be all for it . . . except I'm still not convinced Trump will go up against another faggot-promoting "Liberal-Conservative". Maybe if that position is based only on money and popularity, he could be convinced there are more-profitable and more popular positions. Otherwise, people are going to resort to the "Muslims killing homosexuals" meme; in the history of Islam, there's a lot more homosexuality than killing of homosexuals. Homosexuals also deserve to be killed. So, this meme - without that context - is playing with fire next to fuel; someone has to explain that Muslims will rape, murder, impoverish, lie about who accomplished what or didn't, enslave (often for sexual abuse) those of all Races (but showing a preference for capturing Whites; the word "Slave" deriving from "Slav" because so many South Slavs were captured by Ottoman Invaders) and force many of these to fight from an early age, and generally make life miserable for those permitted to live. Americans typically don't know what a Reconquista will require; these hear more Marxist distortions than facts, if hearing about these events at all. They have proven more talk than action, even when willing to talk about it. The expansion of readiness with which many will talk about such things is a good sign, and some improvements have been made in ethno-cultural cooperation among Whites, but it's an uphill battle. Someone should also point out that Jews have more history of cooperation than conflict, and even the Jews that did fight Muslims have consistently also variously undermined - even openly fought - Europeans. Trump has to know at least some of that, with all his connection, and people to do nearly everything for him, leaving him lots of time to research, so there he has some irrational attachment to the Jews; at least through supporting his Treacherous offspring having such, which is why he has Jewish grandchildren. This fact has yet to sufficiently anger Americans, even with his many compromises, which have done nothing to sate The Left, rather, emboldening it, as his Rightist critics predicted, so the possibility of White Reactionaries is infinitesimal; this parts a large burden on Russia, to be willing to fix the world that others broke before Russians ever adopted any beliefs said others promoted.

"The Vult Right" is more "Left" than it Claims

This may be a Pragmatic Direction, however Transiently it may be; I do not Believe it's Ideal. It is Definitely Better than "The Alt-Lite" (Jew Milo, for Example, and Miscegenator Gavin), as one of the more Reactionary of "Alt-Right" Ideologies, however much it may Attempt to Distance itself from its Memetic Origins, though it would Benefit from a History Lesson and is in Need of Clarifying itself on a Major Point. It is not simply that "Alt Left" (a Term it Applies to "The Alt-Right"; as if Apart from it) is already a Term for those "Socially Conservative but Fiscally Liberal", nor even that "Conservative" was Coined to Refer to those Fighting Both Sides of The French Revolution. Indeed, it was Coined by Serial Adulterer Francois-Rene de Chateaubriand; who (on the one hand) Wrote a Defence of Catholicism yet (on the other) Rejected it in Effect for a Democratic Republic; the Circumstances of his Life not Permitting this to be Catholic, but to Institute The Reign of Terror. It isn't even, though, that those like "Burke" could be Regarded as "Conservatives" only if you're a Protestant; if you're Catholic, these are Usurpers whose Inglorious Revolution has brought nothing but Problems. After all, what Catholic would Conserve a System that Burnt Priests Alive and those who Harboured them? It is this, the Conflicting Notions of "Socialism", and other Conflicting Definitions of "Progress" and "Tradition". "The Vult Right" sounds rather like "Rexism", apart from its Fear of the word "Socialist" in "National Socialist". It has its Similarities to "Falangism", though I can Foresee it being Divided on this Issue the way "The Alt-Right" is Divided on just whether or not "National Socialism" had been and/or would now be an Improvement. Of course, as for the Conflicting Concepts of "Socialism", you could always Remember what Connotation "Capitalist" would Bear (to both those Self-Identified as such and those Opposed, in that Era) and Realize that "Socialist" was the Pragmatic Label. Today, many have the same View of "Capitalism". You could Insist that Adam Smith had 18 Principles for when Government should be Required to Intervene in Economic Matters, and "Capitalists" would Complain that you're a "Socialist" while some other "Socialists" (Marxist Socialists) would Complain that you're Christian (or would Feign Christianity, by Claiming that it would be "Unchristian" to Intervene in these Matters or in the Necessary Way). Henry Ford, for Example, was told that he was a "Socialist" for his Christian Beliefs that he was told "do not belong" in Business; these were a Cultural Means of Limitation, and thus Regarded by "Unrestricted" (Alienist) Corporatists as an Agent of Communism. Ironically, what would be Restricted and what Enabled were Dramatically Different between Christianity and Communism; this were not so, when Comparing the Visions of Anti-Christian "Capitalists" and Anti-Christian "Communists". Having a "National Capitalism" thus Refers to either having something that will Eventually Fail, just Slower than Communism, at Best, if not Faster, as Kowloon Walled City was even more Miserable a Failure than the Disaster of Maoism, as one Example of why "Libertarianism" is not Viable even for Homogeneous Populations, or Redefining "Capitalism" from its Historical Usages. Is it not the Morally-Divorced Form of Smithianism but Smith's Position itself? They speak of not having Trade Across National Lines, but Our Nations should be Able to Trade with one another after doing everything Reasonable to be Self-Sufficient. We should not Trade with Foreign Races, and may Need to Subjugate or Exterminate these Races for Our Own Ends. They speak of not having Empires, but Christianity was its Greatest when it had Empires and/or Personal Unions; not Liberalism. It may be Possible for Nation-States to Exist for the Ethno-Cultures of Europe and not be Ruled by so Centralized a Power, but this is not what has been Observed in History and the General Decline of Our Race would Indicate that a Strong Central Figure is Currently Favourable to More Attempts at a Failed Separation of Powers. The Emergence of Pan-European Cooperation Across Interstate Lines is a Relatively-Recent - Indeed, "National Socialist" - Concept for "Nationalism"; the "Nationalism" that Occurred Prior to this had been Opposed to Empires that had Exactly that Cooperation, as it Favoured Racial Death on Behalf of the Jews it Aligned with (such as Freeing Them from Ghettos or Inviting Them to Return to where They had been Exiled from) to Racial Survival under the "Oppressive Yoke" of another European Nation (or Emperor whose Lineage was the Combination of Numerous European Ethnicities and whose Culture was Reflective thereof). "National Socialism" was Founded by Pagan (Presumed Jew) Alfred Rosenberg as Controlled Opposition, but it was Steered into The Most Viable Opposition Available by Adolf Hitler. That is why he was so Hated by "his own" Party Officials but so Loved Popularly; that Party was Popularly Opposed to but Institutionally Teeming with Jews, Pagans, Homosexuals, Miscegenators and "Progressives" (more of the F.D.R. Variety than those like Dr. Kirkbride and Pastor Muhlenberg, who may now be Regarded as "Paleo-Conservatives", for another Example of Conflicting Perceptions of Nomenclature) that Feuded but Ultimately Favoured one another to Hitler (who was more Lenient than he should have been). Some of these were Purged, as Hitler came to Power; some were not, until Shortly Before The Reich's Fall. There were some Influential Wehrmacht Jews, up 'til The Fall; these Betrayed, having Supported "Reconstruction" (Brainwashing and Profiteering Off Disaster). Still, under Hitler, it was an Objectively-Measured Improvement Over The Wiemar Republic and what The Allies would Effect for it (as They had Long Planned). Thus, there were some Leftisms in the Reign under Hitler [which was Partly his own Decision and Partly that of those around him, some of these not of that Party, but Entrenched from The Wiemar Republic, with some of those from The Monarchy having Favoured him and others Opposed (as the old Hanoverians had Ceased to Defend Europe and now thought only of Reclaiming Possessions that had been Stolen by "Wiemarians", even if it meant Allying with the Enemies of "National Socialism" to do so; this, though the Communists and Their Allies had No Intention of any Restoration To The Thrown or even Returning any Possessions - yet the so-called "Royals" of today actually Favour Communism Over Nationalism)]; yet, what were Promised by its Handbooks on Race and Christianity were Considerably More Opposed to "Jacobinism" and "Communism" than this Internationally-Manipulated Effect. It's True (to be Fair) that the "Handbook on Race" did have Anti-Christian Drivel, always saying "the traditional Christian view" when it's Referring to the "Judeo-Christian" Heresy, as it would Neglect to Explain (or Promote as if Atypically Racialist, in Contrast with History) that Mendel - the Frequently-Cited Scientist whose Laws of Inheritance were at the Heart of its Racial Purism that wasn't actually Practiced by Hitler's Reich (much to the Dismay of The Bureau of Racial Hygiene, it was told to not only make Specific Exceptions but Exceptions for Entire Nations; the Iranians being one Infamous Example, that the Scientists were told to stop Identifying as Non-White) - was a Catholic Bishop. Scientifically, though, it's a Valuable Source. I'd also Suggest you Read the Works of Blumenbach, Broca and Coon, rather than DuBois (Debunked Mulatto), Boaz (Debunked Jew) and Gould (Debunked Jew). Its "Handbook on Positive Christianity" had Mixed Reviews among Catholic and Lutheran Institutionalists, though were Well-Received by Catholics and Lutherans on The Popular Level. The Vatican Played Both Sides, so the Jews were Aided in Escaping Justice during that War but the "N.S." Forces were Aided in Escaping Them after that War. There were two Lutheran Congregations, rather than a United Entity, and I Recall Reading that one didn't Embrace it but Tolerated having "N.S." Members but the other had Excommunicated these. Rosenberg was of the Opinion that "Positive Christianity" would Result in Germanic Rejection of Christianity, as he Believed they would Perceive this Movement as an Attempt to "introduce" Racial Principles to a "foreign" Faith. Of course, Scripture itself is Clear on its Racialism and The Early Church Fathers Announced Our Race's Divine Eminence. Irish, for Example, were Taught that their Celtiberian Ancestors had Israelite Ancestry. Royalty would often Claim Descent from Saint King David. Fortunately, Rosenberg and his Followers were a Numerically-Marginal Presence in Hitler's Reich; these sometimes - Alarmingly - did Occupy High Positions, though it is Undeniable that Hitler's Influence and the Amiability of some others (even Pagan Rudolf Hess) did Result in a Functionally More Christian Society than that of The Wiemar Republic.

But Let's Consider The Essential Issue: The Powers That Be didn't exactly Permit there to be a Pan-Europeanist Purism, so it had to Settle for "Hitlerianism" or Decide to hand over much of Europe to Multiracial Hordes from The Soviet Union; the Rest of Europe, as elsewhere, in every Realm of European Habitation, to "Jacobinism". Sadly, The World Chose The Wrong Alliance. "The Vult Right" seems to be lumping "National Socialism" in with "Libertarianism", Despite that "National Socialism" Rejected Homosexuality (Rohm's Supporters were Cleansed) and Pedophilia (some Libertarians have Encouraged it, as "Freedom of Expression" and/or "Profitable") as but Slower "Communism" (for what does it Matter if it's a State-Owned Company, a Corporate-Owned State or - Overtly or Covertly - Collusion of the two as Nominally-Separate Entities that Oppress Our People?), which I'd say is a Half-Truth; the "Libertarians" were Opposed to "National Socialism" but Never Militantly Challenged "Communism", with some "Libertarian" Movements being Openly Founded by Known "Communists", as in South America, whereas "National Socialism" was The Most Effective Opposition Against Communism, but "National Socialism" was Considerably More Varied than "Libertarianism" to the Extent that it Included the Definition in this Article of "The Vult Right". The Greatest Economy was not that of "Progressive" America, nor its Allies, but that of "National Socialism". A System that Generally Favoured Free Markets but Favoured Public Order Over Material Acquisition or Ego, would be a Favourable System. This was more Effected under "National Socialism" than perhaps any other time in History. Even if you are to Reject its Claims to having Created a "Non-Marxist Socialism", having Purified the Pursuits of the Pre-Marxist "Socialists", or Rejected these as "Too Jacobin" to Purify, as basically a Rebranding of what could be called "Smith(ian)ism", in an Era where Smith himself would not have (otherwise) been Considered, being too Distorted by Jews that Claimed to Represent "Austrian" Mentalities, in Great Contrast to Literal Austrians' Traditions, you would have to Admit - to be Honest - that it were a Crucial Step in the Popular Pursuit of your Ideology; that it'd have been Better if they had Won, as no Fault of any Sub-Movement is not Exacerbated and Added to by the Faults of the Societies which Destroyed Hitler's Reich or the Successors thereof. Largely, it is Due to Half-Truths and Whole Lies that "National Socialism" is not The Popular Favourite for at least its own Era. It has been Blamed for Allied Atrocities, and Hated for a Purging of Mongrels it did not actually Conduct. Had it been Conducted, however, it would have been Objectively Beneficial for Our Race and The Christian Faith. Quintessentially: Regardless of the other Elements of your Ideology, the Question is this: Would you Prefer a Racially-Pure Society of another Ideology, which may in time Return to your View, at least in Part, or is your View one that can be Maintained in a Racially-Impure Society; one that will, Inevitably, be Reduced to the Triumph of one Race over the Rest or Mutual Annihilation? If the latter, are you Certain that this Struggle is Better for Our Race than the other Struggle? If not, why are you Willing to Risk this Outcome? If it is not God's Will that Our Race Survive, which Inevitably will Require Us to Annihilate The Lesser Races, if for nothing else but Resources, however Conservationist the Efforts of any or all Involved, why did He even Bother to Create Us? It is not for Bastardy, nor to Cease to Exist, since he Abhors Adulteration and Commanded the Annihilation of Threatening Populations on Numerous Occasions. Thus, I would Argue that not only should We make Efforts to Convert Our People to True Faith but that We are also Obligated to Protect Our People from even the Best of the Non-White Christians. As per Cultural Matters: That which is not Fundamentally Incompatible may be Accepted, but the Rest must be Destroyed. To Verify this Relationship, that which can Demonstrably Benefit Our Race is Holy to Utilize in this Manner but that which can Demonstrably Harm Our Race is Unholy to Utilize in this Manner. The Church did an Excellent Job of Reconciling Local Cultures With Christianity, by Adopting Festivals and Symbols (et cetera) that could Easily be Reinterpreted in a Christian View but Suppressing the Historical Associations of these; with the Exception of any Racial Value, as - rather - it Taught that Our Pure Race Must Unite For Common Benefit. Much in Contrast with Communism, though some Liars do Conflate it, it Acquired or Destroyed for Our Benefit; not for Our Destruction. It isn't whether or not something is Created or Destroyed, that Matters, but that the Outcome is Beneficial for Our Race (or at least has not Harmed it). We Must Optimize Our Potential. May this Social-ism (Social Belief and Practice) be Beneficial to Us, in Search both of Spiritual and Material Welfare (Well-Being). In Hoc Signo Vinces. Deus Vult!