Tribalism is a powerful force, but so is self-righteousness. While tribalism may win out in the long run(that is if the tribe survives), self-righteousness or outrage mentality has short-term advantage. Being self-righteous is like a cocaine high, something you can’t get from tribalism which is about hunkering down. This is why the Power works very hard to define and control the terms of self-righteousness. Most people are incapable of defining the terms of outrage on their own. It must be handed to them like a bone thrown to a pack of hungry dogs. Consider China during the Cultural Revolution. Mao threw the radical bone of ‘to rebel is justified’ to the youth that then ran riot for a few years smashing everything in their path. It must have felt awesome to be so self-righteous.

As Jewish Supremacists rule the US, they get to define what people should be outraged or self-righteous about. Self-righteousness is intoxicating, a means of instant self-aggrandizement as a ‘woke’ person. Jews pushed Globo-Homo as one of the main themes, and countless idiots since have gotten all weepy and wild about holy homos and transcendent trannies.

In the long run, the Cultural Revolution petered out and Chinese tribalism won out over ideological radicalism, but when it was on fire, it really burned hot and scorched everything in its path. Tribalism is like the soil + rain from which stuff grows. Self-righteousness is like wind + fire. It can’t last forever, but when it does, it is an awesome force that can burn down entire forests.
This is why any side that seeks power must gain control of the terms of outrage and self-righteousness. People claim to be rational and individualistic but, in truth, are often governed more by a collective sense of righteousness & rightness(fed to them by media and academia controlled currently by Jewish Power).
James Watson is correct about IQ differences between whites and blacks, but facts mean little or are downright infuriating to lots of people who idolize Blacks as sacrosanct(and/or awesome). So, righteous chest-beating about blacks trumps factual rightness about race and IQ. Just like more people get excited over emotive astrology than factual astronomy, it’s the manipulation of emotions that often count for more.

It’s been said people are naturally tribal, the most powerful passion in the world. Is it? If so, why did so many tribal identities fade? Jewish Identity survived, but what happened to the Babylonians, Assyrians, Hittites, Ancient Egyptians, Phoenicians, and countless others? If tribalism is so resilient, why did those cultures vanish? While some peoples/cultures were physically wiped out, most identities and cultures faded away without mass deaths. Instead of people clinging to their identities, cultures, and languages, they abandoned those for something else. In some cases, the changes were forced on them at the point of the sword.
Many peoples had no choice but to convert to new faiths and rituals. Consider all the pagan cultures that were eradicated in Europe and Near East as the result of the spread of Christianity and Islam. But then, many tribes willingly abandoned their own cultures and beliefs to adopt something deemed more pleasing or prestigious.

Granted, tribalism, if sufficiently rich, broad, and/or potent, can be deeper than credo or faith. A Russian was a Russian before communism, during communism, and after communism. One could be Greek in the ancient world and choose from various schools of philosophies. Whether one was a stoic or an epicurean, a Greek was a Greek. A people can keep their tribalism even as they change values and beliefs. Modern Chinese have adopted much that is Western in ideology and economics, but they still feel as ethnically Chinese.

But, there were many more extinct cultures than living-and-continuous ones. And most of them went extinct because their members gave up on their core tribal identity. In some cases, it was a case of ‘take on or assimilate to new identities’. Or, people just gave up on high culture & complex identity and receded into subsistence living, like what happened to peoples who scattered into the jungles following the collapse of the Mayan civilization(prior to the arrival of Europeans) or Khmer civilization(that left behind Angkor Wat but not much else).

Jews have been the exception than the rule in human history. Among ancient identities, Jewishness is one of the few that managed to survive to the present. While today’s Egyptians have genetic links to Ancient Egyptians, there was a decisive break from the past. It took Western archaeology to rediscover much of the lost ancient world and reconnect the natives to their forgotten pasts.
Besides, the spread of Christianity and Islam had the effect of ‘cultural genocide’ on both the Near East and Europe. As the coming of the One God demanded the destruction of pagan cultures, the baby of tribal ancestry was thrown out along with the bath-water of pagan ‘superstition’. Only sufficiently high pagan cultures were preserved as myths, legends, and artistic expression.

The histories of Europe and Near East have been, more or less, continuous since the time they adopted monotheism derived from Jewish spirituality, albeit at the cost of fundamental breaks with their pagan pasts. In contrast, medieval Jews didn’t need to undergo a ‘radical’ break from their ancient origins because, from the beginning, they had faith in the One God.
The story of the Jews illustrates how, despite credo and ethno being separate categories, one can deeply affect the other. Even though the coming of Christianity didn’t wipe out the white European race, the change in credo led to the destruction of indigenous pagan culture rooted in blood-and-soil, in effect eradicating certain strains of tribal consciousness. And much the same happened in the Near East with the spread of Christianity and then Islam. Also, the Byzantium, or the Christian East, though spared the onslaught of the Germanic barbarians, underwent profound changes as Christianity suppressed and even destroyed much of the glories of pagan culture that held within them the markers of tribal identity.

Monotheism was both the greatest destroyer and the greatest enabler of tribal identity. On the one hand, it had the power to wipe out indigenous pagan cultures and beliefs so crucial to tribal identity. And yet, people whose spirituality was imbued with monotheism of the all-powerful Being of truth, goodness, and mystery were more likely to possess a culture of continuity and constancy, a kind of ‘rootedness’ to heaven and ‘footedness’ in destiny. After all, the one true God is bound to offer a deeper sense of moral uplift and spiritual truth than a bunch of imperfect pagan gods who, however colorful or ingeniously conceived, tend to be vain, fickle, and/or amoral in their desires and demands. Monotheism ensured the continuance of newly conceived or profoundly revised identities and cultures in both Europe and the Near East. Even pagan elements that survived were either Christened or Islamized via syncretism.

Anyway, even though tribalism is a real force in nature and history(which is, after all, the story of human nature), its resilience mustn’t be exaggerated or taken for granted. There are plenty of counter- or related(but distinct) forces that can work against tribalism, even destroying it almost overnight in historical time.
Materialism and individualism are but two. If indeed tribalism is the most powerful force, why have so many people been willing to move to another country, especially the United States(and other parts of the West), to start anew as ‘Americans’, ‘Australians’, or ‘New Europeans’? Why so readily betray and dispose of one’s own peoples, cultures, and lands to come to the US and take on a new identity, especially for one’s children who usually forget their ancestral language, culture, & sense of history and eventually assimilate into Americanism? And why have so many white Americans(and even Europeans) adapted to or even embraced radically altered definitions of who they are? Why are so many Irishmen willing to champion the notion that a newly arrived African, Hindu, Muslim, or Vietnamese is just as Irish as they are? What happened to the natural power of tribalism? It’s been said that people must be conditioned and indoctrinated to be anti-tribal, but many people, when freely given the choice of tribalism or individualism/globalism, happily choose the latter as morally sound, culturally enrichening, and economically viable, indeed far more so than tribalism. If many people in big countries feel they have too much land and resources for only themselves, many in small countries feel restricted and confined to limited resources and opportunities.

The US as the global destination is all the more jarring given its long history of war. There’s always been a fair chance that the America one assimilates into could make war on one’s nation of origin, in which case one will have to support directly or indirectly the American War on one’s blood kin in one’s ancestral land. Consider the German-Americans who fought in World War I against Germany. Consider Muslim-Americans who took part in the invasion of the Middle East that led to deaths of 100,000s(or maybe millions) of Muslims. Indeed, just about ONLY nation that the US is unlikely to wage war on or politically threaten/abuse is Israel as Judeo-centrists have total lock on US politics.

So, why did people come to the US and give up their identity and culture of origin? They were tempted with materialism(as US is obviously richer than most nations) and freedom(of which US has more to offer than most other nations, though so-called ‘wokeness’ is chipping away at it; granted, non-white immigrants and especially their children are likely to support reduced freedom for whites because Jewish media/academia have spread the message that unfettered free speech could lead to ‘white supremacism’ that will close the gates to further non-white immigration, in which case immigrant groups won’t be able to bring over their relatives via chain-migration).

Material interest and individual freedom have often trumped tribalism. It’s been said Chinese are proud of their culture and history, but look at all those Chinese who not only flock to the US, Canada, and Australia but readily lose their identity to become ‘New Americans’ and ‘New Canadians’. And in our Age of Cool, so many people find the real culture of history, heritage, and community to be ‘boring’ & ‘lame’ and chase after the siren song of pop culture and fashion. For a lot of whites, it only took some TV shows to change their minds on a moral and cultural issue as fundamental as marriage, which is 80% of American morons now support ‘gay marriage’. And for shallow dolts like Charles Murray, all it took was status anxiety to change his mind.
And even though the US makes threats on Iran and Russia all the time(even to the point risking a major war), there are plenty of Russians and Iranians who are willing to drop everything and come to the US and become ‘Americans’ even though their tax dollars will go toward hate-mongering against their nations of origin.

The power of tribalism is real, but it can be surmounted or circumvented by other factors, such as pleasure. Why do black men chase after white women and vice versa? Because jungle fever is pleasurable to both parties. Black men find white women to be fairer, and white women go with black men who are more muscular and have bigger dongs. And consider all the Asian women who go with non-Asian men and all the Mexican women who go with ‘gringos’. Vietnam may have won the war, but it’s back to ‘me so horny’ antics again, and so many Asian women who remain single and barren in places like Japan, Korea, and China will instantly jump at the chance of marrying a foreigner, especially white, and having mixed-race kids.

Perversely, tribalism can lead to strange alliances that may actually undermine tribalism. In World War II, Nazi Germany was allied with Imperial Japan against the UK even though Hitler actually admired and respected Anglos while having a rather low opinion of the Asian race(as unoriginal and inferior). Instead of white vs yellow, it turned into white-and-yellow vs white. But because of the Anglo-Germanic conflict, Germany made an alliance with an Asian nation(just like it allied with Muslim Ottoman Empire in World War I). And Anglos recruited lots of nonwhites from their empire to fight the Axis powers.
During the Cold War, white America came to an understanding with yellow China against white Russia. And from the late 19th century to now, Japan has been allied mostly with the West against Asia. It was only during World War II that Japan invoked Asian Brotherhood as a ploy against European and American Imperialists. But prior to the falling out between Japan and the US, both were ‘partners-in-crime’ in their aggression against the Asian mainland. And after WWII, Japan was once again allied with the US against much of the mainland, especially Red China. So, yellow tribalism sided with white tribalism against another yellow tribalism. And when the US and China drew closer under Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, and Ronald Reagan, it was white tribalism(of US) siding with yellow tribalism(of China) against another white tribalism(of USSR).

Granted, one could argue that the US and USSR were not motivated by ‘white tribalism’ as both empires professed grandiose universalist ideologies, but for most of US and USSR history, one could not discount the white political consciousness as a key element in foreign policy(just like current US policy makes no sense unless we take Jewish ethno-centrism into account). Until relatively recently, US power was essentially white and Christian. And in the USSR, people of European stock had most of the power compared to Central Asians and Muslims.

Perhaps, one difference is that, during the Cold War, Anglos increasingly lost power in the US(mainly to Jews), whereas ethnic Russians increasingly gained power in the USSR(mainly from Jews). When the Cold War began, the US was still solidly in the hands of Wasps, whereas Soviet leadership was varied, especially under the leadership of Georgian Stalin. After Stalin, the new leader was Khrushchev the Russo-Ukrainian. But as years passed, Russian nationals increasingly gained leverage in the USSR(especially with the suppression of Jewish power that came under suspicion as linked to Zionism), whereas power in the US increasingly shifted in favor of the Jews.
Of course, capitalism was bound to favor Jews in the long run because sky’s the limit in a market economy. Even though Jewish radical intellectuals played a significant role in the communist takeover of Russia, the system of machine politics and ethos of equality(and mediocrity) were bound to suppress the power of Jewish ingenuity, drive, and ambition(for good or ill).

Another way tribalism can be used against itself depends on programming. Now, this doesn’t apply to solitary animals that even shun others of their own species EXCEPT in mating and mothering, but among social organisms, the tribal instinct can be reprogrammed to serve another tribe. Certain species of ants carry out mass theft of larvae of another species that hatch to serve the very ant colony that ‘enslaved’ them. Humans can toy with canine ‘pack’ nature to make dogs serve man against other dogs. Thus, tribal nature isn’t suppressed or extinguished but, instead, re-attached in service to(and possibly identification with) another tribe. The Janissary was a historical example of such a formula. Ottoman Turks scoured Christian Greece and Balkan territories to conscript young boys who were deemed especially attractive, healthy, and intelligent. These boys were initially traumatized in their separation from family and culture, but under intensive Muslim training, they became fanatical servants of the Ottomans. Their tribalism was reprogrammed to serve the Ottomans and Islam against Christendom, their ancestral homeland.
Another useful example is the fate of Korea under US hegemony. The US divided Korea and gave half to Stalin. Since then, one people have been made into two peoples, and Korean tribalism has been set against one another, brother against brother. One might expect Korean tribalism to call for unity of all Koreans against non-Koreans, but South Koreans are essentially reprogrammed minions of the US empire that would rather serve the US than reunite with their ethnic brethren in the North who are seen as the ‘mortal enemy’. As wanna-be-Americans, they welcome the occupation of their nation by a superpower for ‘protection’ and dream of moving to the US to become ‘New Americans’ than preserve their identity and culture.

And in the US, consider how white tribalism has been reprogrammed to serve Jews and Israel. Anti-White Political Correctness had managed to condition many whites to feel that white identity & white interests are intrinsically ‘racist’, ‘supremacist’, and evil, and therefore white tribalism must emotionally attach itself to something else(without the mark of Cain)… and it is invariably Israel, Israel, Israel(and the worship of blacks and homos).
It’s no wonder then that most US politicians would rather be dead than be caught with white pride. And, they will go out of their way to shout Hallelujah for Israel, the nation that now means most to them. It goes to show that tribal feelings are not necessarily loyal to the tribe to which one belongs or sprung from.
Even among wolves, on rare occasions a lone wolf might join a pack that was once an enemy pack. Among Europeans, some Frenchmen settled in Germany and essentially became Germans and fought against France in World War I. And there were French Jews whose tribal loyalty was to France, and there were German Jews whose tribal loyalty was to Germany. Many such Jews gave up on Jewishness and even came to loathe it.

And oftentimes, people would rather be allied with winners of another tribe than be stuck with losers of their own kind. Consider all the non-Romans who joined and fought for the Roman empire. And this is especially true of women for whom tribalism is less important than put-out-ism to the victors. When Germans defeated and occupied France, many French women went with victorious ‘alpha’ German men. After the US destroyed and occupied Japan, many Japanese women became war-brides of Americans. And when black guys began to beat up white guys in boxing and other sports, so many white women put out to winner-black-men and felt contempt for loser-white-men.
But winner-ism is powerfully alluring to men as well. Jews won the elite competition for top power in the US, and the result has been all these white male cucky-wucks pledging their loyalty and offering their services to Jewish Overlords. It’s like Sal switching his loyalty to Barzini upon sensing that Corleones are finished in THE GODFATHER. Just look at Donald Trump. Jewish Power has been ramming him in the arse, but his only reaction is, “Can I suck your dick?” Jewish Power took everything from the likes of Jared Taylor, but their only hope forward is to win over the Jews. Pathetic.

Even though many of these whites are Christians, they would rather serve the awesome-winner-Jews than their own communities. For sure, they dare not oppose anything that the Jews desire or covet. So, if Jews insist on Globo-Homo as the future of the West and the favored mass cult of white folks, even white ‘conservative’ Christians hide their tails between their legs lest they displease the winner-Jews.

Tribalism is further complicated because life is the product of union of the two sexes. If mankind replicated itself asexually by individuals reproducing copies of themselves, then sexual politics would matter far less. Suppose there’s a tribe of people where all the women are taken by another tribe or willfully go off with it. If the men of the tribe could produce doubles of themselves like single-cell organisms, the tribe could continue without the women. Perhaps, if cloning becomes the New Normal in the future, nations will survive by creating new life from laboratories like in Aldous Huxleys’ BRAVE NEW WORLD.
But for now, a tribe or nation can only survive by creating new life from the union of its men and women. This is why a tribe where women lose respect for the men or where men lose the means to support families faces extinction.
It certainly explains why Jewish Supremacists are pushing black African invasion into Europe and promoting Jungle Fever among whites. They know that the black race and only the black race can effectively destroy white manhood because black men have harder muscles, bigger dongs, more aggression, and stronger voices. This leads to white male cucky-wuckery and jungle fever among white women who become ‘thots’.

Capitalist Feminism is defined in terms of ‘empowerment for women’, but, at a deeper level, it is predicated on female desire for submission to a higher power. It’s just the nature of female psychology that yearns for a king than to be one. Women aren’t fulfilled with ‘liberation’ alone. They value greater freedom as a means to seek out the ideal man who can make her ‘feel like a woman’. If most women had to choose between patriarchy & Robert Redford and feminism & Danny DeVito, most would opt for the former.
In that sense, feminism, or at least capitalist feminism, is a form of elitism. If anything, traditionalism was more egalitarian when it came to sexual politics because the moral order stressed chastity, reputation, marriage, fidelity, and family. Also, as most well-paying jobs went to men, women had to find some nice guy and settle down.
Most men are not ‘alpha’ and not super-successful. They are middle class or working class. And in the past, most middle class and working class men could find a woman and have a family. And women had to be content with ordinary men. But with the ‘liberation’ of women, the great majority of women want the ‘best’ because the cult of ‘empowerment’ says women should ideally have it all. We went from Patriarchy to Bratriarchy, a world of spoiled brats who think they are too good for the ordinary and middling. Capitalist feminism turned into a game of women seeking ‘liberation’ from ordinary men to seek out and submit to the superior or ‘alpha’ men. It’s no wonder so many women are hooked on stuff like FIFTY SHADES OF GREY where an every-woman meets a man who is handsome, strong, and super-rich.

While all women may have had such fantasies throughout history — all those fairy tales of princes and princesses — , they lived in the real world with a real culture of family, church, and community. But with the rise of Pop Culture as the main staple for the great majority of modern folks and with the delusional toxicity of PC ideology taught in schools, people no longer have realistic expectations of life. Too many males see the world through the prism of superhero comic book fantasies, and too many females model their lives on the diva-mentality of celebrities who seem to have it all. (Is it any wonder that the hottest ‘moral’ topic in our Age of Vanity is Globo-Homo-mania?)

In the long run, tribal-transference is most doable among those within the same race. If a bunch of Poles transferred their tribal loyalties to Germany and decided to become Germans, their descendants would become Germans like other Germans. There isn’t much genetic difference between Germans and Poles, and most people would hardly notice much difference if a Pole claimed to be German. Many modern Turks are not Turkish in origin — some are actually Greek or Lebanese in blood — , but one would hardly tell the difference because there isn’t all that much difference between Greeks and Turks(at least those who are essentially European in blood).

But tribal-transference can be problematic among those of different races. Notice how most European ethnic groups became assimilated into Anglo-America. In time, Poles, Swedes, Germans, Irish, and even Italians became Anglo-Americanized and pledged their main loyalty to the Anglo-made America.
But it’s been far more problematic with blacks due to race. For much of US history, whites had difficulty accepting blacks as equals, and since the Sixties, blacks have resisted melding with generic White America that they find to be inferior, a world of ‘slow, lame, faggoty-ass white boys’. Of course, black men like white women but see it as ACOWW or Afro-Colonization-of-White-Wombs whereby black babies are made via black sexual conquest of whiteness.

They say Slavery has been the main cause of the divide and friction in America, but it isn’t so. If whites had enslaved other whites, freed whites would likely have just mixed with other whites, just like emancipated Russian serfs just became fellow countrymen with other Russians. Likewise, if American Indians had been white, they would likely have just assimilated fully with invading European whites. But because they were racially distinct, they were seen as the Other and pushed out of their lands. If a bunch of Chinese moved to Japan and made a sincere effort to become Japanese and if Japan accepted them as such, they would likely just meld in over time. But if a whole lot of non-Asians went to Japan and tried to fit in, they would still stick out from the native population because they look different. Japanese would notice, as would the non-Japanese newcomers. Looks do matter. If one could push a button and turn all black people in the US into whites, the two communities would likely come together much faster.

Is there a force more powerful than tribalism? In short-term behavior, yes. If tribalism is about “I am”, idealism is about “I am right”. In a brutally savage or barbarian world, the concept of “I am right” hardly matters. Who has time for higher morality or abstract ideals in a world of tooth & claw or sword & spear? The only thing that matters is survival and struggle. It’s about live-or-die. One’s main focus is on “I am”. “I am alive, I am part of this tribe, I am willing to fight to live for another day.” It’s like wolves are fixated on survival, which is justification enough for struggle.
But once a people develop civilization and learning, the elites become guided by laws, ideas, and principles. And the power of principles eventually come to define society as a whole. In time, elites justify their power on something more than ruthless might or the fear factor. Rather, the elites argue that they have the divine right to rule or have the mandate of heaven under god(or gods). And they justify their rule on the basis of sacred laws and theories of justice. People should obey them for their right-to-rule than mere might-to-rule. By gods or laws, the elites of high civilization want to be perceived as representatives of the noblest laws of the universe than merely fellas with the most wealth and weaponry.

In an advanced society, “I am” is never enough. People need to feel “I am right”, a need for moral/spiritual justification. Granted, there could be more to tribalism than “I am”, which some might characterize more as individualist and ‘libertarian’. One might say tribalism is less about the ‘I’ than the ‘we’. Also, it’s more than about “We are”(in the moment) because deep tribalism is about the past and future. It’s about the memory and vision of “We were, we are, and we shall be.” In that sense, tribalism can be noble in sentiment and meaning. It is about much more than the immediate demands of the present, the only thing that matters to animals that have no sense of history or heritage.

Of course, not all forms of tribalism are imbued with depth. Jungle tribalism among primitive folks lack deep memory in the absence of written language and bodies of literature. Such tribalism is mostly about belonging to the tight-knit community of the all-important moment. It is the tribalism of sports-teams or street gangs where a bunch of guys stick together against rivals. Like the gangs in the movie THE WARRIORS. The main unifying force in such a tribalism is the constant threat of danger and/or thrill of adventure. It’s about the need to stick together in fight-or-flight mode, indeed not much different from the pack instinct of wolves.
In contrast, deep tribalism is not just about unity of the moment but unity of the past with the present and future. As Merlin admonishes the Knights in EXCALIBUR who exult in the thrill of the moment, “…and look upon this moment. Savor it. Rejoice with great gladness. Great gladness. Remember it always, for you are joined by it. You are One, under the stars. Remember it well, then… this night, this great victory. So that in the years ahead, you can say, ‘I was there that night, with Arthur, the King!’ For it is the doom of men that they forget.”

(Granted, too much memory can be problematic as well. With all the history and literature in the modern world with vast stores of knowledge, where does one even begin? Many don’t bother at all as the subject is too long, wide-ranging, and complex. There is also the problem of expertise in advanced civilization. History becomes specialized and maintained by trained professionals while most people focus on other things and leave it up to others, the experts, to preserve the history. In contrast, even though a primitive tribe with an oral tradition retains far less collective memory, everyone takes part in the tales and myths around the campfire as their ‘history’ can only be preserved through constant retelling and sharing. And, the rise of academism has taken passion out of history whereby a people’s story becomes just another subject of study, like chemistry or math. The overall impact is a sense of detachment from one’s heritage as it’s become just another part of the curriculum, one that ANY people may study and become experts in. But then, not all is dispassionate in the current order as passion about something is essential to keeping the system together and directing it toward certain agendas. As it happens, histories and cultures that are non-white, non-Jewish, non-black, and non-homo are mostly given the dispassionate treatment. In contrast, histories and cultures that are white are given the negative-passionate treatment, or passions that are hostile to notions of white identity, pride, and power. Finally, histories and cultures that are Jewish, black, and homo are given the positive-passionate treatment, i.e. there is nothing nobler and more redeeming than to venerate and celebrate all things Jewish, black, and homo. So, no special feelings about Arabs, Iranians, or Japanese, only hateful feelings about whites, and only worshipful feelings about Jews, blacks, and homos. Such is the formula of the current West.)

Without the memory of and reverence for the past, the power and prosperity in the present lose their deeper purpose. Also, people are less likely to make sacrifices if they won’t be remembered and if what they sacrificed for is not defended by their heirs. And people are less likely to guard what they have IF they don’t appreciate the struggles and sacrifices of their ancestors or if they’d been made to disrespect them by alien propaganda or ethno-masochism. This is why War Memorials are important. In the noble sense, it is a way for people to remember and honor the fallen who’d died in defense of or service to the order. In the cynical sense, it is a hook(of ‘heroism’) used by the Power to ‘inspire’ naive young men to serve in future wars.

Individuals who are swept up in the heat of the moment may fight ferociously but rarely to sacrifice themselves for the higher good. It’s for the thrills, glory, or trophy, all of which are fleeting. Those who are willing to sacrifice themselves do so on the promise that their civilization will remember and honor them. And that what they’ve fought and won for their side will be appreciated, defended, and kept by their followers.
It explains why Jews are hellbent on desecrating the memory and the graves of white folks and all their perceived enemies and rivals. As an advanced civilization, the West has a deep memory and powerful sense of history, that of great triumphs and tragedies. When people in the present feel a deep connection to their forebears, they are committed to preserving and defending what their predecessors made of the land, the culture, and history. To sever these roots, Jews promote infantile youth culture, mindless hedonism, mania-for-moment, selfish individualism, white shame & ‘white guilt’(premised on the unique evil of whites throughout history), Afro-mania, homo-vanity, and retrofitting of white history whereby the New Narrative says European Medieval history was not white, European heroes & great men were black, and ‘diversity’ was the defining feature of the West. In other words, whites have little to be proud of, but if they still hanker for memory and history, they should invest their emotions in the divine and noble history of the Jews, the Perfect People who were never wrong and always in the right in their relations with wicked goyim, especially white ones. Or they should pretend Julius Caesar was a Negro.

But then, this mental habit developed first with the spread of Christianity. As the Bible became the central text for all of Christian West(that search-and-destroyed most remnants of paganism that had been so deeply entwined with indigenous European history and culture), most white folks looked to Biblical stories of the Hebrews as a kind of meta-ancestral canon. It was as if white folks, as Christians, were more spiritual descendants of the ancient Hebrews than blood descendants of their direct pagan ancestors.

Still, at least with Christianity, whites were imbued with a sense of spiritual-moral superiority(or at least parity) in relation to the Jews. However, since the end of World War II, the abandonment of the core Christian credo has effectively abnegated moral superiority to the Jews(even atheist ones) because the new Christian consciousness placed redemption-and-salvation-from-‘racism’(the biggest victims of which were Jews in the Shoah according to the Jewish-run Narrative) at the center of its theology.
Once Christianity thus cucked to Jews as the Holy Holocaust People, its miserable fate became one of serving the diktat of the Jewish globalist agenda, which is why so many churches are now into Homomania, a proxy globo-cult concocted by Jewish supremacists.

If white people are to survive, they must search for roots in the soil that have yet to be severed by the Jewish ax or poisoned by Jewish toxins. The fact that there is some push-back against globalism is proof that not all roots have been destroyed in the European Tree.

Even though tribalism can be deep in meaning, it rarely inspires instant passion(except for revenge in extreme cases, like when a kin has been killed by another clan or one’s homeland has been attacked by another country). Indeed, deep tribalism is often less intense than shallow tribalism. Street gangs with the shallowest tribalism will rumble and even kill/die over trifles for the thrill of the moment. It’s a way of showing off to one’s pals and gals that you’re made of tuff stuff.
Tribalism among primitive tribes and street gangs is often emotionally intense because you are closely and even intimately associated with each and every member. Everyone knows everyone in a street gang or in a jungle tribe. It’s like the camaraderie among a platoon of soldiers in combat.

In contrast, deep tribalism encompasses and embodies something much richer and grander. It’s about a sense of connection with the deep and distant past. It’s about a sense of unity and shared destiny with people who are strangers, whose existence one isn’t even aware of.
After all, most Turks only know their immediate family, friends, and co-workers. Most people they pass by in the streets are total strangers, and they will never come in contact with most Turks. And yet, nationalism is about one’s sense of connection to every member of the Wider and Deeper Tribe.
Deep tribalism is like a train. It takes more time and energy to get it going, unlike shallow tribalism that can roll into action instantly(like a skateboard), as in THE WARRIORS when the fellas know they have to stick together to make it back home. But, just as a train in motion has far greater force and momentum than any skateboard, deep tribalism in action has power way beyond shallow tribalism. American tribalism was slower to enter World War II(as they figured Germany and Japan posed no immediate threat to Americans), but once it gained critical mass and momentum following the attack on Pearl Harbor, it was an unstoppable force of a united people out for vengeance. Same with Russia’s reaction to the German invasion. Once Russians recouped and realized what was really at stake, they put on a massive show of force to defend the motherland.
This is why deep tribalism is both an awesome asset and a serious liability. While most of us will jump into action to defend our family or friends, it takes much more for a whole people to move into collective action because it’s about the unity of purpose and shared sacrifice with people who are strangers, with whom one has no intimate connection.

Deep tribalism is all the more lethargic and dormant when the elites are useless or have been co-opted by another tribe(with imperialist stranglehold over the nation). If FDR’s problem was the difficulty of rousing up the populace to enter an overseas war, the current problem in the EU and US is that the ruling elites(or the pseudo-elites servile to Jewish Power) are unwilling to wake up the people to defend the homeland and push back against the Great Replacement(or White Nakba) engineered by Jewish globalists.
Jewish globalists are more than willing to rouse up white people to invade Iran or wage war on Russia, but they do everything to ensure that whites shall do NOTHING to defend the nations of their origin or founding. In other words, Jewish Supremacists have reprogrammed white tribalism into a tool for fighting Wars for Israel and doing nothing to defend white homelands from Diversitzkrieg.

Because deep tribalism is like a locomotive that requires great energy, consensus, and unity to get moving, there is a chance that a people can fade as an identity & culture in their failure to summon up the forces of nationalism. It’s like someone freezing to death because he fails to start a fire in time. The deep tribalism of nationalism is like a campfire done the old way(by rubbing sticks together), one that takes time and energy to start but, once it gets going, provides heat all throughout the night. Jews have thrown water on the white wood, and it is now difficult for the white race to start a nationalist fire. (In contrast, Zionism comes with lighter-fluid and matches, which is why white cucks prefer the ease of the Jewish fire without realizing they will eventually be gutted and cooked over it.) Zionists have urinated all over the white logs of the West, and it appears no one can get the white fire going in places like the UK, France, Sweden, and etc. Hungary and few other nations have been the exceptions than the rule. Upon observing the massive invasion of Europe, Viktor Orban stepped up his game as national leader and inspired fellow Hungarians to unite to preserve the sacred nation of their heroes and ancestors. But in Germany, France, Spain, Sweden, and the UK, the response has been wholly different, with the leaders welcoming the invasion, suppressing patriotism, shutting off the diesel engine of the deep tribal locomotive, and silencing debate & criticism. But then, the problem is even more dire because, even had the national leaders stepped forward in defense of the realm, too many people would have opposed them and demanded that the borders be flung wide open to WELCOME the endless waves of ‘refugees’ and ‘migrants’. And to understand why this is so, we need to consider a force that is, at least in the short-term, stronger than tribalism.

We know that pleasure is a powerful force. People will cheat on their spouses for pleasure. People will use terrible drugs for pleasure and ruin their lives. People will blow their life-savings and the house for the thrill of gambling. Students will fail exams in their addiction to TV, video-games, or pop music. People grow dangerously obese in their addiction to food.
It is for this reason that globalism pumps the populace with non-stop diversions that offer pleasure via pop music, blockbuster movies, TV shows, pornography, video-games, and all sorts of apps. The human mind becomes like a pinball machine that is always ‘ON’, bumping & bouncing & rolling & ringing. When we add up the number of people whose lives have been ruined by addiction to stupid pleasures, it staggers the mind. Pleasure-seeking and pleasure-plugging — why seek out pleasure when all you have to do is ‘sign in’ or ‘log on’? — are such a mainstay of our existence that a new kind of ‘morality'(or immorality as the new morality) has grown up around it.
So, having loose sex isn’t just lewd behavior but ‘empowerment’ and ‘liberation’. And just about every other TV show is praised as the ‘greatest TV show of all time, indeed a work of art’. Demented pop music is said to be ‘inspirational’ with their ‘messages’. Football players who ‘take a knee’ to defend fellow racial thugs are to be admired as moral exemplars. And killing unborn babies up to birth is about ‘women having choice’. It’s bad enough that so many people are addicted to excessive pleasures, but it’s much worse when such are ‘moralized’.

Still, except for the issue of abortion, ‘moral capital’ has yet to be fully invested in current pleasures, though trends favor the turning of vices into ‘new virtues’. Gambling has become mainstream, and libertarians have come up with philosophical as well as economic reasons as to why it should be legalized, but most people don’t take moral pride in gambling(even though it has been associated with ‘reparations’ for American Indians). That said, our current culture doesn’t lack for themes steaming with Moral Outrage and Self-Righteousness, and this is a potent threat to deep tribalism.

Granted, moral outrage and self-righteousness can exist side-by-side with tribalism, that is IF one’s tribe happens to be sanctified as holier-than-others for whatever reason. During the Westward expansion of Manifest Destiny, white people held this view that they were furthering progress and civilization whereas Indian savages stood in their way. So, in any struggle with the Indians, especially when the Red hostiles carried out massacres against white settlers/pioneers, white people felt moral outrage and moved into swift action to flush out the Indians as an act of vengeance, justice, and progress. Back then, being white and spreading white civilization were conflated with the moral progress of humanity.

Jews associated Zionism with the Shoah, and so, the Narrative has long asserted that Jews have the right(and even an obligation) of pride of identity and nationhood to prevent another mass-killing of Jews. And in the Age of Anti-Imperialism(that ran parallel to the Cold War), non-white folks around the world felt pride of identity and morality in expelling the European(or American or Soviet) colonists or occupiers.
But, in an earlier era, European Imperialists would have felt pride of identity and morality in spreading the light of civilization and/or the blessings of Christianity to the benighted folks around the world living in darkness or stagnation.

The dynamic between identity and morality depends on WHO gets to control the governing ideas, narratives, and the flow of information. If the prevailing idea says “the West is spreading the light of civilization to the darker parts of the world”, white identity gains prestige as the crusading race shouldering the burden of uplifting the rest of mankind. If the narrative says “great progress has been made in the non-white world under white rule”, white imperialism is vindicated and justified.

Now, It may well be true that white imperialism did bring civilization or advancement to most parts of the world. (The process was no less true in Europe itself where the more advanced and powerful states often intruded upon weaker and relatively backward ones and compelled them toward change.) It’s also true that the lives of non-white natives did greatly improve in myriad ways under Western hegemony. But, there were also countless acts of brutality and betrayal(of promises and/or stated principles). And there were surely white massacres of the natives.

This is why the flow of news and information is of utmost importance. Indeed, one reason why white-ruled South Africa failed whereas Jewish-ruled Israel thrived was due to Jewish control of the flow of information. Jews made South Africa out to be uniquely evil while covering up or rationalizing Jewish oppression over the Palestinians(while also greatly exaggerating the Palestinian acts of terrorism against Jews).
Just like the production of goods is useless without the means to distribute them, the production of news is only as good as the means to disseminate them. Jewish Power not only produces a lot of news content but controls the networks through which even the news generated by others is at its mercy. Same is true of money. Consider the SWIFT system that expelled Russia upon the start of the Ukraine War. In their control of the financial systems around the world, Jews can even restrict the flow of capital that isn’t theirs. Even with news generated among non-Jewish groups, Jewish Power gets to cherry-pick those which are in service of its favored narrative. Jews know that the control of information isn’t enough. The real key is the control of the flow of information.

The mere control of the flow of info can justify even a murderous regime as the Lesser Evil. Given the core tenets of the National Socialist ideology, it was a challenge for the German government to persuade the national volk that the war was about bringing liberty and progress to the Slavic populations. So, how did the Hitler’s regime justify its aggressions and wars? They ran countless propaganda about how the Soviets were utterly beastly and monstrous.
In other words, never mind the ‘necessary’ brutality of the Germans in Russia given that the enemy was many times worse, at least according to the permitted flow of information.

Ironically, Jews are playing a very similar game in the current Middle East policy. If the Zionist Neocons rode high on the rhetoric of vanquishing terror and spreading democracy in their Iraq War venture, they’ve since justified further wars in the Middle East and North Africa on grounds that the enemies are simply far worse than ‘we’ are. Never mind the absence of high-minded objectives, and just support the war against Assad as ‘the butcher of Syria’ or Iran as Evil Incarnate.
As the American public was dead-set against further deployment of US troops in major ground operations, Jewish Supremacists had to rely on proxies, and the most willing happened to be Jihadis, exactly the kind of people involved in the 9/11 attack. If the official line on the Iraq War was ‘destroy tyranny to build a democracy’, the new line was ‘destroy to destroy to destroy’.
How did the Zionist globo-imperialists justify their support of ‘moderate rebels’(euphemism for Jihadi terrorists) in Syria? It was like German propaganda about the Russian Slavs in World War II. Assad(and before him Gaddafi) had to go and their nations had to be destroyed because they are simply bad, awful, evil, and ‘monstrous’. The US had no meaningful alternatives for their future upon implementing ‘regime change’. The big idea was that ‘evil regimes’ must be destroyed, and that’s that. So, the Jewish-run media ran countless reports about how Assad was yet ANOTHER Arab Hitler who had to be toppled, and never mind the consequences of Syria being torn apart by war. In the absence of a positive proposition in foreign policy — “we can offer something better” — , push the negative proposition of mayhem for mayhem’s sake on grounds that the irredeemable ‘barbarians’ simply must be destroyed.

Tribalism can be reassuring in its sense of community but can feel restrictive and suffocating, like in a prison. Same goes for the family, which means home but also considerable loss of individuality. No wonder so many people leave their own ‘tribal’ communities and come to the US where they can feel free as individuals unshackled from identity and culture(which lend meaning but also place burdens). (Of course, one mustn’t assume that other countries, especially non-Western ones, are necessarily any more tribal and/or traditional in the era of globalism. There are now likely to be just as many deracinated and atomized individuals in the non-West as in the West as so many people underwent urbanization and consume pop culture, much o