“Modify the standards of the in-group”: On Jews and Mass Communications — Part Two of Two

Go to Part 1.


“Millions of leaflets, pamphlets, cartoons, comic books, articles
and more recently radio and movie scripts — have been produced and disseminated in the propaganda war.”  Samuel H. Flowerman, Mass Propaganda in the War Against Bigotry, 1947.[1]

The Protocols of Samuel H. Flowerman

Samuel H. Flowerman, as Research Director at the American Jewish Committee, as colleague of the Institute for Social Research, and as a kind of hub for the expansive Jewish clique of mass communications scholars, was at the center of the drive to put Jewish “opinion research” initiatives into practical action. The clearest articulation of what this practical action would look like was articulated in his 1947 essay, “Mass Propaganda in the War Against Bigotry.” Flowerman’s foremost concern was that, although millions of dollars were being spent by organisations like the American Jewish Committee and the Anti-Defamation League on propaganda, propaganda may not by itself be sufficient for the mass transformation of values in the host population — in particular, for the weakening of its ethnocentrism.

Flowerman begins by explaining the format and extent of existing efforts: “Millions of leaflets, pamphlets, cartoons, comic books, articles — and more recently radio and movie scripts — have been produced and disseminated in the propaganda war (429).” Flowerman’s use of the language of warfare is of course interesting in itself and will be discussed further below. For now, we should focus on what Flowerman lists as the five aims of the “propaganda war”:

1. “The restructuring of the attitudes of prejudiced individuals, or at least their neutralization.”
2. “The restructuring of group values toward intolerance.”
3. “The reinforcement of attitudes of those already committed to a democratic ideology perhaps by creating an illusion of universality or victory.”
4. “The continued neutralisation of those whose attitudes are yet unstructured and who are deemed “safer” if they remain immune to symbols of bias.”
5. “Off-setting the counter-symbols of intolerance.” (429)

Flowerman concedes that the level of work and control required to achieve these aims would be extensive, and that the project was highly ambitious, seeking nothing less than “successful mass persuasion in the field of intergroup relations (429).” But he is equally clear in the conditions required for such success.

Flowerman’s first condition is “control by pro-tolerance groups or individuals of the channels of mass communication.” (430) Since Flowerman’s entire context of “pro-tolerance” activism was essentially Jewish, we may assume he is strongly implying that the channels of mass communication should fall into Jewish hands. Since “control” in Flowerman’s phrasing is not qualified, and since many newspapers, radio stations, and movie production companies were already in the hands of “pro-tolerance” Jews, the implication is also present that this control should be absolute. In addition, notes Flowerman, total control of these channels may still not be sufficient in itself. The host population will still need to be exposed to the productions of mass communications, and this was to be assured via “force, commercial monopoly, and/or crisis (designed or accidental).” (430) Only then would ‘pro-tolerance’ forces see “the persuasive devices and techniques of the elite playing upon the susceptibilities of the manipulated.” (430) Flowerman closes here with reference to Erich Fromm’s theory that people have “a desire
to be controlled.”

The second of Flowerman’s conditions for “successful mass persuasion in the field of intergroup relations” is saturation. This condition, like that of control and monopoly of the channels of mass communication, is intended as absolute. In other words, the message of “pro-tolerance” was to be ubiquitous and all-pervasive — beyond what was possible in 1947 and probably beyond what could even be conceptualized in 1947. In Flowerman’s words: “In addition to the large sums of money currently being expended on tolerance propaganda, significantly greater sums would probably be needed to achieve the degree of saturation — as yet hypothetical — required.” (430) The general idea here is to increase the “flow of pro-tolerance symbols” as a proportion of “the total stream of communications.”

In November 1946, a three-day convention, partly organized by Flowerman, was held in New York, bringing together “experts in the general field of public relations, including advertising, direct mail, film, radio, and press; professional workers on the staff of national and local agencies specifically concerned with fighting group discrimination; and social scientists from the universities and national defense agencies.”[2] Jews, of course, dominated all of these areas, and the list of attendees included the previously mentioned figures Bruno Bettelheim, Sol Ginsburg, Hertha Herzog (radio research director of McCann-Erickson, Inc.), Julius Schreiber, Paul Lazarsfeld, Joseph Goldsen, and Morris Janowitz. One of the findings of the mass communications scholars present at the convention was that even control and saturation may not be sufficient to ensure a transformation of opinions and values in the demographic majority. This was the case when the propaganda encountered particularly strong-minded individuals, or when the propaganda got lost in the overall stream of communications that one encounters in the course of everyday life. Flowerman thus writes with frustration that “we are developing a nation of individuals who work, worry, love, and play while news commentators, comedians, opera companies, symphony orchestras, and swing bands are broadcasting. This continuous onslaught for ‘something for everyone’ results in a kind of ‘radio deafness.’” (431) In order to overcome this obstacle, Flowerman returns to a key aspect of his first condition — the use of crisis (he writes that this can be “designed or accidental”) to focus attention on delivered propaganda. Flowerman writes:

As for overcoming the ‘radio deafness’ to commercial announcements and the general atmosphere of make-believe of radio entertainment, only symbols associated with acute crisis would seem to have a chance. For the great bulk of American people racial and religious intolerance is not regarded as a critical situation. … The absence of critical stress serves to diminish levels of attention to pro-tolerance symbols. (431)

Practical contemporary examples of what this tactic might look light would be the ubiquity of pro-diversity propaganda in the aftermath of Islamic attacks, Charlottesville, school shootings, moral panics about racism, ADL hype about the ever-present threat of anti-Semitism, murders by immigrants, and migrant drownings in the Mediterranean. The point here is that regardless of context, “crisis” is to be manufactured into almost every situation in order to focus attention on the real goal — the successful delivery of “pro-tolerance” messages, even (or especially) in circumstances in which tolerance has proven deadly, to the host population. Jews or, in the more ambiguous phrasing, “the agents of pro-tolerance,” would thus need to achieve (in Flowerman’s own words) the ambitious trifecta of “control, saturation, crisis.” (432) Crisis is therefore Flowerman’s third condition.

The fourth condition is the achievement of an alteration of predispositions in the individual via modification of their surroundings and peer pressure. Here Flowerman argues that “pro-tolerance” propaganda should not rely on intellectual means but instead on “social perception, which is affected by the predispositions of the audience. In turn, these dispositions are affect-laden attitudes which may have been produced by parents, teachers, playmates, etc.” (432)

The point here is that Flowerman and the mass communications clique believed that their propaganda would be better received by the masses if the psychological context of reception was itself changed. In other words, people raised in the demographic majority who are imbued with a sense of communal pride, social responsibility, cultural achievement, and national purpose are unlikely to be predisposed to be receptive to messages on behalf of outsiders. Some intervention in peer interactions and peer culture was thus necessary in order to break up such an obstacle to the reception of “pro-tolerance” propaganda. As just one example, we return here to Flowerman’s 1950 article for New York Times Magazine in which he argues for the training of teachers “as engineers of human relations instead of instructors of arithmetic and spelling.”[3] Children can thus “engineered” to be more receptive to “pro-tolerance” propaganda in adulthood.

This condition bleeds into the fifth — the manipulation of the basic instinct of humans to conform to group standards. Flowerman writes:

Consciously or unconsciously, individuals use group frames of reference in social situations even when they are physically separated from the group. … The strength of group sanctions is a potent force to reckon with even for an individual with a strong ego. … It would appear, then, that to be successful mass propaganda on behalf of out-groups would have to modify the standards of the in-group. … Mass pro-tolerance propaganda, to be successful, would have to change such values, which would be difficult to imagine without control, saturation, crisis, etc. (432)

What Flowerman is proposing here is essentially a revolution in values, after which a politically correct culture emerges where the demographic majority becomes self-policing and antagonistic to its own ethnic interests. In this environment — achieved via “control, saturation, crisis”— the strength of group sanctions among the White American in-group is directed towards manifestations of in-group ethnocentrism instead of outsiders. It’s nothing less than a proposal for the cultivation of White guilt and pathological altruism, and the diminishment of White ethnocentrism and cultural pride.

The sixth condition is the cultivation of influential figures on behalf of the “pro-tolerance” agenda. This required great subtlety. Flowerman writes that the research of his mass communications colleagues and co-ethics shows the targets of their propaganda:

are willing to assign to some individuals a stamp of approval which they deny to others … We know that many leaflets written and endorsed by popular heroes and accepted even by prejudiced individuals are often dismissed on the ground that they are being distributed by minority groups in their own self-interest. Many prejudiced individuals cannot conceive of such distribution by dominant groups. (433)

What Flowerman is here complaining of is the fact that some members of the demographic majority are perceptive enough to accurately point out the real origin of “pro-tolerance” propaganda, and to dismiss it on those grounds. By “minority groups,” the coy Mr Flowerman of course means Jews. He then cites a specific case:

In an experiment being conducted at the University of Chicago by Bettelheim, Shils, and Janowitz, veterans were exposed to pro-tolerance propaganda including a cartoon by Bill Mauldin. A prejudiced respondent, sharing the general esteem in which this popular soldier-cartoonist is held by ex-GI’s, said that he had regarded Mauldin as a “regular guy” but he supposed that if you paid a man enough you could get him to do anything; this respondent believed that the material he saw was being distributed by “a bunch of New York communists.” (433)

Thus we see the pathologisation of a veteran because he perceived with stunning accuracy the hand of subversion behind the use of a popular icon to promote an agenda entirely alien to his interests. Despite exceptions such as this veteran, the overall susceptibility of the masses was deemed sufficiently high for the strategy of “sponsorship” to be progressed. As a result, reports Flowerman,

propagandists, recognising the need for impeccable sources of authority, are producing material endorsed by popular heroes in sports, entertainment, and in the armed forces. Recently a plan has been developed to promote the insertion of full-page newspaper advertisements paid for and sponsored by “respectable” local business organizations. The effect of this campaign will have to be determined. (433)

Developed alongside his colleagues in the Institute for Social Research and the mass communications clique, these, then, are Flowerman’s six conditions for a radical transformation of values in the White American demographic majority:

1) Control of the channels of mass communications;
2) Saturation with Pro-tolerance messages;
3) Crisis, designed or accidental;
4) Diminishment of Cultural Pride and Self-esteem;
5) Cultivation of Self-Punishment and Group Self-Sanctioning;
6) Sponsorship of willing dupes or traitors.

Although these six conditions form most of the body of “Mass Propaganda in the War Against Bigotry,” Flowerman also spends some time discussing the ideal content of “pro-tolerance” propaganda. In this regard, he comments:

The most striking feature, the spearhead, of propaganda, is the slogan. … Current pro-tolerance or anti-intolerance slogans urge unity and amity, warn against being divided by differences of race and religion, describe our common origin as immigrants to these shores, remove myths about racial differences, and denounce bigots and bigotry. Some popular slogans are: Don’t be a Sucker!, Americans All – Immigrants All, All Races and All Creeds Working Together etc.

Don’t Be A Sucker! was the name of a wartime film produced by the Army Signals Corps at a time when it was working heavily alongside Jewish Hollywood executives and script writers; its film production center was headed by Col. Emmanuel ‘Manny’ Cohen.[4] According to Wikipedia, the film:

has anti-racist and anti-fascist themes, and was made to educate viewers about prejudice and discrimination. The film was also made to make the case for the desegregation of the United States armed forces. An American who has been listening to a racist and bigoted rabble-rouser, who is preaching hate speech against ethnic and religious minorities and immigrants, is warned off by a naturalized Hungarian immigrant, possibly a Holocaust survivor or escapee, who explains to him how such rhetoric and demagogy allowed the Nazis to rise to power in Weimar Germany, and warns Americans not to fall for similar demagogy propagated by American racists and bigots. In August 2017 the short film went viral on the internet in the aftermath of the violent Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia and various copies have been uploaded to video sharing sites in the past year.

Flowerman was dissatisfied with the slogans of his time, however, believing them to be too “general in nature, vague as to goals, and unspecific as to methods.” (434) He believed that merely defining fascism as the enemy was insufficient because, at that time, the host population believed “fascism was strictly a foreign phenomenon characteristic particularly of Nazi Germany.” Propaganda depicting fascism as the enemy was therefore going to be ineffective in making the host population see its own values as oppositional and requiring destruction. Referring to works like The Authoritarian Personality, Flowerman writes: “Studies abound in which subjects subscribed to tenets of fascism although they rejected the fascist label itself. The pervasiveness of prejudice in so many individuals makes it difficult to set up a real enemy.” (434) He acknowledges that “in much anti-intolerance propaganda” the enemy is defined as “white, native-born Protestants,” but makes it clear that he wishes this to be expanded “for logical and psychological reasons.” One gets the impression that “Diversity is our Strength” and “Fight Hate” would have been much to his satisfaction.

*****

We now find ourselves returning to our point of departure. “The whole story is transparently barmy,” said the Guardian’s Jason Wilson when discussing “conspiracy theories” about Cultural Marxism. Consider again what he says this “conspiracy theory” amounts to:

The vogue for the ideas of theorists like Herbert Marcuse and Theodor Adorno in the 1960s counterculture culminated with their acolytes’ occupation of the commanding heights of the most important cultural institutions, from universities to Hollywood studios. There, the conspiracy says, they promoted and even enforced ideas which were intended to destroy traditional Christian values and overthrow free enterprise: feminism, multiculturalism, gay rights and atheism. And this, apparently, is where political correctness came from. I promise you: this is what they really think … The theory of cultural Marxism is also blatantly antisemitic, drawing on the idea of Jews as a fifth column bringing down western civilisation from within, a racist trope that has a longer history than Marxism.

In light of the facts addressed in this essay, such a theory would seem thoroughly borne out, with the only required alterations being that the process started before the 1960s and involved many more figures than the staff of the Institute for Social Research. The problem with people like Wilson is that they are proof of the very ‘conspiracy theory’ they refute. Raised in a controlled media, saturated with pro-tolerance propaganda, psychologically blasted with crisis after crisis, stripped of cultural pride, consumed by White guilt, and influenced by purchased “sponsors,” he is the perfectly gullible product of the protocols of Samuel H. Flowerman and the mass communications clique.

Not barmy, but more or less ridiculous, Wilson becomes an intellectual pygmy biting at the heels of his betters — those who, like the veteran in the study of Bettelheim, Shils, and Janowitz, see the true origin of the propaganda and are pathologized for their perceptivity.


[1] Flowerman, S. H., “Mass propaganda in the war against bigotry,” The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 42(4), (1947) 429-439.

[2] S.H. Flowerman and M. Jahoda, “The study of man – can prejudice be fought scientifically?” Commentary, Dec., 1946.

[3] S. H. Flowerman, “Portrait of the Authoritarian Man,” New York Times Magazine, April 23 1950, 31.

[4] See for example, Richard Koszarski, “Subway Commandos: Hollywood Filmmakers at the Signal Corps Photographic Center,” Film History Vol. 14, No. 3/4, (2002), 296-315.

26 replies
  1. Rerevisionist
    Rerevisionist says:

    It’s fascinating to see how Jews themselves are implicitly supposed to need to be propagandized. Flowerman (Blumenkopf? – just a guess) want his fellow Jews to be saturated, along with all the rest. I’d guess this is part of the rabbinical outlook of these horrible liars.

    • Rerevisionist
      Rerevisionist says:

      A little-noticed fact about Jews is how their multiple frauds have to be kept separate from each other, a potential weakness. Jewish scams include the Holohoax, war crimes in Vietnam, the immigration frauds, money supply frauds, AIDS, 9/11, nuclear ‘science’, and even the deliberate harm of discouraging salt in food. There’s an ‘e pluribus unum’ attitude by Jews; they seem to think mutual frauds can be kept up forever, branch offices in effect each running their schemes.
      …….. This is what is implied by the notion that groups of Jews involved in crime must remain mutually at arm’s length from each other. This is usually worded in a pro-Jew way, but as usual the underlying principle is rather different: each fraud is complicated and elaborate and specialised, with its own insider Jews and collaborators. There’s always a chance some Jewish group may blunder into accidental exposure of another such group. For example, 9/11 Jewish fraudsters, vs Holohoax fraudsters, vs Pentagon records destructions fraudsters, all have a mutual support problem.
      ……. It’s important to get beyond Kevin MacDonald’s one-topic outlook of forced immigration, and identify and forcibly attack all the frauds, so the supposedly united Jewish facade cracks and breaks under recriminations.

      • Franklin Ryckaert
        Franklin Ryckaert says:

        You will have to provide for concrete examples of Jewish “mutually conflicting frauds” to prove your thesis. The only example I can think of is Jewish promotion of multi-culturalism and open borders for all Western countries but mono-culturalism and only immigration of Jews for Israel.

        • Rerevisionist
          Rerevisionist says:

          Well, any Jewish fraud is potentially a problem, when they are in decline. Take the Holohoax: it seems likely this will be exposed, so the main people behind it are likely to be criticised by all other Jews, however hypocritically. Take the Liberty: if the survivors get their act togther, this will make a problem. Take the Talmud, as it (I hope) becomes exposed: many Jews will have a hard time explaining their lack of interest and action. Or the Fed Reserve, and Jewish frauds: if people want their money back from Jews, there may be a lot of infighting. On genocide in Armenia: if the Jews responsible start to be called to account, other Jews have a motive for getting rid of them. Would you like more “concrete examples”?

    • Charlie
      Charlie says:

      Bear in mind Jews are NOT religious. They’re atheists that stole their identity from the Hebrews. The Hebrews have long tried to disassociate themselves from Jews and for it have been labeled “Self Hating Jews”. This explains a LOT if you look deeper and especially the vitriolic hatred Jews have always had towards Christians, Catholics and Whites (please take note of the capitalizations I’ve made of specific words. Jews are not the only ones that get to have their group Capitalized!!! All group descriptions should be capitalized as they’re a possessive noun in the English language)

  2. Loren Rich
    Loren Rich says:

    It is all making so much sense. I grew up in Seattle and so many people there hate their whiteness. It is absolutely bizarre. And even I was completely duped by their propaganda to go to war in Iraq. My heart goes out to all the white hero’s who have been killed or wounded in wars for the Jews. I would be high pissed if it were me and I knew it was all a scam to get us to kill Muslims/Arabs for the Jews. I am hoping and praying that we wake up and stop them from using us to attack Iran. Why should we sacrifice our best and brightest for their nefarious uses. Why do we continue to give Israel one dime? They need to pay us back Trillions and we need to start moving them to their homeland. They can do whatever they want there. Just don’t mess with us. If I have been woken up, they are in big trouble.

  3. Right man for the job
    Right man for the job says:

    I have no intention of reading Flowerman or Adorno or others in their Semitic caravan of social pseudo-scientists. They were resurrected thirty years ago by Robert Altemeyer who served it as slop to willing masochists. I have no knowledge of Altemeyer’s DNA content.
    http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/

    Altemeyer concocted yet another “survey” to ferret out evil right-wingers (bka psychologically normal Whites)!
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_authoritarianism

    Bobby’s poison dripped down from Canada to Australia, then to Bond University (founded 1987) and into the dissertation of Gareth Norris https://epublications.bond.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1028&context=theses . After using parametric statistical techniques (and even the forgotten Cronbach’s alpha test) Dr. Norris concluded: ““Results are therefore merely suggestive of a relationship and warrant further replication and clarification before they can satisfactorily explain the phenomenon observed here. More sophisticated statistical analysis may also provide illustration of many of the relationships between the variables.” Usual tripe for “Give me research money.”

    My reading interest focused upon the groups which he surveyed, one of which was the Masonic fraternity in the UK. Bad choice, Dr. Gareth…1). there are competing Masonic lodges through Europe and the Americas, 2) the group was not random, 3) the narrative was based on anti-Masonic minister John Ankerberg ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ankerberg ), and 4) ignored the variegated Masonic population….George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Franklin Roosevelt, Gerald Ford, Barry Goldwater, Earl Warren, Harry Truman, Salvador Allende, Benito Juarez, and lots of Catholic clergy and bishops in South America (I sat in lodge with them); lots of other problems with what Gareth declareth.

    Bottom line: all the descriptors for the “authoritarian personality” evolve exclusively from Jewish self-identity. The Yiddish dementos define themselves and then project the results onto the hapless Goyim who pay exorbitant .university tuition to wallow in such garbage.

    Glad Joyce offered this article; it revitalized my interest in deceptive psychological practices.

  4. dolph
    dolph says:

    By relentlessly promoting Blacks and encouraging mass immigration, the Jews have overplayed their hand and they know it. The system itself is now in danger of chaos and collapse. There is no multiracial coalition, and in general the various Asian, Hispanic, and Black groups do not get along.

    To keep America together now requires endless financial engineering, mass manipulation, etc. It’s not going to last, folks. The endgame has started, the only question is how long does it take. And the Jews have nowhere left to flee, they know this as well.

    • Ted
      Ted says:

      They are going to flee to Israel. This is why Israel was recently officially christened the Jewish State and why Jerusalem was internationally recognized as the capital.

      The only question will be if Jews eventually will realize their slave-master world supremacy end-game from Israel or if they will be confined there like poison spores in a pod. Time will tell.

      What is clear is that the goodwill and support that they were depending on has almost completely fallen apart. They can’t exactly rule with a broad de facto social no-trust vote. After all, it took the Holocaust narrative to buy them sixty years of good-enough will. That’s gone now and isn’t coming back. Increasingly, people are outright dismissing Jewish sources for any media and political action. Without that power of in-group trust in their out-group signals, they’re effectively screwed.

      This was unsurprising considering how green they are at running things overtly. Their nature doesn’t provide the required finesse. The monkey-anger and associated actions are too quick to pop. Their cultural entitlement is too high and too antiquated (this plan was formulated a couple of thousand years ago) and thus their overall patience is too low. They have religious robots giving the orders, and so flexibility is low. They could have slow boiled this for another couple of hundred years and been much more successful. One wrench in the gears was that some iron age scribe decided that they need to wrap things up from about 250 years from now, or no dice theologically speaking. Hence, the lack of patience.

      Look for large scale social sabotage if they begin to realize that they aren’t going to get what hey want (in fact, this may have been happening for some time now).

      The military needs to takeover the media outlets and route the intelligence services for double agents. Only after than occurs will a fresh start be a possibility.

  5. Trenchant
    Trenchant says:

    An enlightening series.

    It would be naive to imagine that the groundbreaking work of Orson Welles in his Mars Attacks! broadcast passed unnoticed to the media owners and political agitators of the day. Even since, acceptable public discourse centers on interpreting the extraterrestrials’ intentions and not on the little green men per se.

  6. Rob Bottom
    Rob Bottom says:

    How frightened and paranoid they must be getting, when the immediate reaction to their latest volley of anti-White propaganda is met with hundreds of people flooding the comments naming the Jew. We’re almost at the point where any time such a video appears on YouTube, within minutes a veritable swarm of angry frogs rain upon it the wrath of the awakened Anglo-Saxon:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjHg65JORi8

    As depressing as our current situation may be, there is hope as more people become educated about these issues. All of their well-laid plans are becoming undone, a process that will only hasten as whites are made a minority in our homelands and the propaganda war intensifies. Already the anti-White propaganda has become so obvious and vicious that large numbers of non-Whites rally to our side as the underdogs, at least online where such matters are discussed.

    A recent report listing the “Alternative Influence Network”, roundly criticized by its intended targets, got at least one thing right: race realism and pro-White identity politics is a growing counter-cultural movement that is exciting precisely because of its naughty nature. And the pendulum continues to swing.

    • blake121666
      blake121666 says:

      The irony is that I do not think that woman in your video link, Robin DiAngelo, is Jewish! She has a very Italian vibe coming across to me. Italians and Jews have many similarities. She very well COULD be Jewish; I kinda doubt it though. She most likely has been merely influenced by Jews. Who hasn’t?

  7. Bob
    Bob says:

    (Mod. Note: Bob, you and another commenter both noticed the typos. I just fixed the second type you noted, but if the TOO editor hasn’t repaired the first one yet, his hands are probably full with other items. The first typo requires author/editor approval since it’s a content change. Thanks to all you “eagle eyed” commenters out there!)

    UPDATE: Dr. MacDonald just informed me he fixed it. Hope it all makes sense now.

  8. RoyAlbrecht
    RoyAlbrecht says:

    “…1) Control of the channels of mass communications;
    2) Saturation with Pro-tolerance messages;
    3) Crisis, designed or accidental;
    4) Diminishment of Cultural Pride and Self-esteem;
    5) Cultivation of Self-Punishment and Group Self-Sanctioning;
    6) Sponsorship of willing dupes or traitors. ”

    Reasons for my relatively higher level of immunity to “Jew-itise” were:

    1) Fluency in German and ability to distinguish between German Retard (Jew) and Normal German (co-ethnics) names in media propaganda, text book publication, etc… Rejected cultural filth en mass: I.e. victor’s history, hippy devolution, Negro worship, etc…

    2) Grew up in a neighbourhood surrounded by hostile Jews and Broke Back Jewminion of Kafkada Limeys in everyday life but,
    was able to retreat into ethnic enclaves of culture (German Club) in the evenings and on weekends.
    Developed a sense of Volksgemainschaft early on could compare first hand the social networking of Crippled Jews and duped Limeys,
    so even though I was later thrown under the bus by my own Germans kinfolk who had surrendered their ethnic interests in exchange for money and jobs,
    my immunization level had already become quite strong.

    3) The “crisis” subjected to were seen through as fabricated based on the pattern recognition of:
    high frequency of occurrence,
    timing of occurrence and,
    that others were allowed to pass through the same loopholes even though they were less talented.

    4) Ancestors were
    the Royalty of Prussia (Konigsberg),
    famous pilots,
    wealthy German business magnates and high level politicians.
    Moreover, my immediate relatives and elders were authoritative figures (Staadsekretaer Nord Rhein Westfalia, President of local Community College, many respected elders, etc…) that confirmed behaviour (cuning, usury, etc… & laying out objectives [Holocaust |Lie of the Deformed Jews, media & banking control, etc…] )of the Retarded Cohort (Jews) from a very young age.

    5) Self-punishment took the form of:
    first high performance athleticism and
    later asceticism leading to a bodhisattva state of enlightenment.
    Turned punishment toward introspection resulting in heightened levels of perception. (i.e. lemons into lemonade)

    6) Parents were agnostics and was therefore not required to attend church (Jew captured territory),
    Father was instrumental in pointing out ignoble behaviour amongst my (((own))) crypto-ethnic “…kin…” as being idiots, thieves and money grubbers.

    Lastly…, although once again the author has written an excellent piece…, I ask myself if the element of secrecy amongst the (((enemy))), namely;
    secrecy in leader/king-ship,
    secrecy in ethnicity,
    secrecy in overall agenda and,
    the resultant advantage conferred in (((their))) unilateral campaign of ethnic genocide against Whites has been sufficiently addressed?

      • RoyAlbrecht
        RoyAlbrecht says:

        Sorry, but I can not.
        Most of what I know about Jews has been a product of:
        1) a life time of experience both as I was growing up and later as I worked my way around the world for about 25 years.
        2) what close German friends and relatives told me they experienced with respect to Jews both in Germany and elsewhere,
        3) gaining the missing pieces of the puzzle that were filled in by reading and listening to sites like this for nearly 20 years now.

        You should probably ask this question as a stand alone comment to get better exposure. There are probably dozens of people here who are way more qualified to give you an answer than me. I consider myself to be a relative dummy around here who is not very well read.

  9. George Kocan
    George Kocan says:

    This brings to mind what Rahm Emanuel said, “Never allow a crisis go to waste.” Emanuel served as President Obama’s chief of staff and as mayor of Chicago. Of course, he is a Democrat.

  10. Michael Adkins
    Michael Adkins says:

    Since the 1960’s European men and women have suffered a kind of torture in the homeland and Diasporas. And those torturing have profited twice. A good example is abortion; by making the conceived subhuman the European birth rate been has lowered and the door opened to determine all future genetic continuance of European peoples.

  11. Fenria
    Fenria says:

    Excellent analysis. I was so intrigued, I had to go find this obscure psychological research paper for myself in pdf form. It was worth the $12 to have irrefutable proof that this is not just some collective madness of paranoid white people, but is, in fact, a very real agenda to fully remake the demographic and social landscape of the US to jewish liking.

    The reality is this, in a nutshell: If widespread diversity and forced integration of peoples with wildly different moral standards, lifestyles, and societal expectations was such a desirable thing, no one would need all of these antics designed to convince them of it. It would simply be the way of things, the entire world over. The fact that it is not the norm, and is an engineered social situation that must constantly be reintroduced to a population via threat of social shunning and loss of economic viability for the individual just shows that there is absolutely nothing natural about the agenda of Flowerman and other jews like him.

  12. Bennis Mardens
    Bennis Mardens says:

    Frightening horrible stuff.
    I remember very clearly getting lectured in the 6th grade regarding the “dangers of ethnocentrism,” and those same lectures were repeated endlessly throughout JH and HS.
    And then in college “diversity” was the term that was endlessly repeated until it became a joke.
    This article certainly kills the idea that pathological altruism is our fault. Clearly, we used to have built in survival mechanisms in place
    until they were removed by this diabolical paranoid tribe of psychotic lunatics.
    Sadly, they spew propaganda on their own group as well, which fuels insane paranoia, hatred, and fear.
    The documentary “Defamation” is worth your time to gain an understanding of what they do to their own children
    to solidify ingroup preference and outgroup hostility.

  13. Peter
    Peter says:

    Maybe someone could send a copy of Dr. Joyce’s article to the intellectual pygmy Jason Wilson. I am tired of know nothings acting like know-it-alls. Even my own family members, all of whom I love, they believe totally in the mainstream consensus. But if you can get a disbeliever to actually read an authoritative piece, or if you can present a good argument yourself, you can break through people’s ignorance. And this ignorance runs from the most uneducated to those with PHD’s. People have been filled with daily and continuous propaganda their whole lives beginning more than 80 years ago.

Comments are closed.