Aryan Skynet

Once Aryan Skynet Goes Live It Doesn't Matter Who Pulled The Switch

Carl Jung’s Spooky Postwar Proto-Petersonism

Two years ago, an acquaintance handed me several books by Carl Jung, one of which was 1957’s The Undiscovered Self. Actually, apparently having forgotten that he had already given it to me, he later gave me a second copy of this same title, which I’ve finally gotten around to reading – and I have to say that I’m disappointed – disappointed and bored, to be frank. This isn’t a book I would give to anyone once, let alone twice. The Undiscovered Self, which takes as its theme the peril experienced by the individual in the age of totalitarianism, scientism, the Cold War, and compromised and inadequate organized religion, consists of nothing but page after page of watery generalities. In fact, The Undiscovered Self conveys not so much the mind of a pioneering and controversial psychologist, but rather evinces the air of one of “Intellectual Dark Web” notable Jordan Peterson’s individualist diatribes.

For Jung – at least in this book – “individual life […] is the only real life”1. Jung proposes to foster in the psychiatric patient “enough certainty of judgment to enable him to act on his own insight and decision and not from the mere wish to copy convention – even if he happens to agree with collective opinion,” continuing:

Unless he stands firmly on his own feet, the so-called objective values profit him nothing, since they then only serve as a substitute for character and so help to suppress his individuality. Naturally, society has an indisputable right to protect itself against arrant subjectivisms, but, in so far as society itself is composed of de-individualized persons, it is completely at the mercy of ruthless individualists. Let it band together into groups and organizations as much as it likes – it is just this banding together and the resultant extinction of the individual personality that makes it succumb so readily to a dictator. A million zeros joined together do not, unfortunately, add up to one. Ultimately everything depends on the quality of the individual, but the fatally shortsighted habit of our age is to think only in terms of large numbers and mass organizations, though one would think that the world had seen more than enough of what a well-disciplined mob can do in the hands of a single madman. Unfortunately, this realization does not seem to have penetrated very far – and our blindness in this respect is extremely dangerous. People go on blithely organizing and believing in the sovereign remedy of mass action, without the least consciousness of the fact that the most powerful organizations can be maintained only by the greatest ruthlessness of their leaders and the cheapest of slogans.2

Peterson

The comparison with the “Intellectual Dark Web” – the kosher assortment of academic “renegades” that includes Peterson, Ben Shapiro, Christina Hoff Sommers, and Thiel Capital executive Eric Weinstein – is appropriate in view of the fact that Jung dedicated The Undiscovered Self “To my friend Fowler McCormick” – a scion of the Rockefeller dynasty with whom Jung was close. “By the 1940s Fowler was proving the best expression of Rockefeller-McCormick liberal values,” writes Clarice Stasz in The Rockefeller Women. “Committed to correcting past injustices brought upon African-Americans, he was a major fundraiser for such groups as the United Negro College Fund Campaign and the Committee on Race Relations.” He was “in the forefront of American businesses in establishing antidiscriminatory hiring practices”3 – which is to say, undercutting white labor. McCormick, writes Jennifer Delton in Racial Integration in Corporate America, 1940-1990, established “one of the most progressive racial policies in American industry. Yet [sic] he continued the McCormick family’s war against unions.”4 With such figures in his social circle, Jung’s professed abhorrence for “mass organizations” of a “million zeros” becomes more understandable.

Jung

Carl Jung

Jung even throws a bone to the overpopulation hysteria then being promoted by the Population Council, established in 1952 by John D. Rockefeller III and future Secretary of State John Foster Dulles5. Jung looks forward to a “metamorphosis which external reality cannot provide, namely, a deep-seated change of the inner man, which is all the more urgent in view of the mass phenomena of today and the still greater problems of the increase of population looming up in the future.”6 Jung had a Dulles connection of his own dating from his involvement with the CIA forerunner the Office of Strategic Services during the Second World War, when he served as a psychological consultant and was known as “Agent 488” to Swiss Director of the OSS Allen Dulles. By 1943, Jung and Dulles were already setting about the arrangement of an “experimental marriage between espionage and psychology,” reveals Deirdre Bair in Jung: A Biography7. “With his professional credentials and new personal connection to Allen Dulles (who would become the director of the CIA in 1953), Jung became a charter member Cold Warrior while deflecting highly publicized accusations that he was anti-Semitic and a Nazi sympathizer,” Jay Sherry explains in Carl Gustav Jung: Avant-Garde Conservative8.

What had happened was that Jung could see that his more interesting flirtation with a nationalistically oriented school of psychology and his preference for Hitler over Stalin and the Jews would have to be tidied up a bit if his illustrious career as the grand old man of analytical psychology was to survive and adapt to the demands of the postwar order. He would pledge his allegiance to the new establishment by writing the sort of material that would be in demand in a world increasingly dominated by Washington, Wall Street, Jews, and the CIA. Thus, by the 1950s, when he wrote The Undiscovered Self, his publisher the New American Library could boast that Jung’s book “was prompted by conversations between Dr. Jung and Dr. Carleton Smith, director of the National Arts Foundation”9, an organization which had been founded in 1949 “with the full approval of President Harry Truman”10. The New American Library itself, also notable for publishing the James Bond novels, was founded in 1948 by U.S. Office of War Information veteran Victor Weybright and German-born Jewish expatriate Kurt Enoch. Indeed, Jung’s intelligence connections and his status as “Agent 488” are especially thought-provoking in view of his interest in eastern religions, mind expansion, dreams, hallucination, radical self-expression, and hyper-individualism of the type expressed in his conception of “the individual human being […] as the measure of all things”11 – all rather eerily predictive of the 1960s “counterculture”.

Jung488

Rainer Chlodwig von K.

Rainer is the author of the blockbuster Alt-Right film book Protocols of the Elders of Zanuck: Psychological Warfare and Filth at the Movies.

Endnotes

  1. Jung, Carl. The Undiscovered Self. Trans. R.F.C. Hull. New York, NY: New American Library, 1958, p. 22.
  2. Ibid., pp. 67-68.
  3. Stasz, Clarice. The Rockefeller Women: Dynasty of Piety, Privacy, and Service. Lincoln, NE: iUniverse, 2000, p. 289.
  4. Delton, Jennifer. Racial Integration in Corporate America, 1940-1990. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2009, p. 133.
  5. Banks, Nancy Turner. AIDS, Opium, Diamonds, and Empire: The Deadly Virus of International Greed. Bloomington, IN: iUniverse, 2010, p. 232.
  6. Jung, Carl. The Undiscovered Self. Trans. R.F.C. Hull. New York, NY: New American Library, 1958, p. 70.
  7. Bair, Deirdre. Jung: A Biography. New York, NY: Little, Brown and Company, 2003, p. 492.
  8. Sherry, Jay. Carl Gustav Jung: Avant-Garde Conservative. Palgrave Macmillan, 2010, p. 185.
  9. Jung, Carl. The Undiscovered Self. Trans. R.F.C. Hull. New York, NY: New American Library, 1958, p. 7.
  10. Sciannameo, Franco. Experiencing the Violin Concerto: A Listener’s Companion. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2016, p. 63.
  11. Jung, Carl. The Undiscovered Self. Trans. R.F.C. Hull. New York, NY: New American Library, 1958, p. 52.
Advertisements

About icareviews

Author, Protocols of the Elders of Zanuck: Psychological Warfare and Filth at the Movies

51 comments on “Carl Jung’s Spooky Postwar Proto-Petersonism

  1. icareviews
    May 11, 2018

    Reblogged this on icareviews.

    Like

  2. bob saffron
    May 11, 2018

    One wonders what sort of man would film himself wimpering and release the footage. Is this the behavior of a paladin of Western tradition?

    Unus vir, nullus vir, “No Man is an Island” etc.. Even the dumbest libertarian must know that to be shunned by a group (no work, no trade, no cooperation, no protection) is to become a pariah, a Robinson Crusoe DIYer. Pariahdom is a death sentence.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Don Logan
    May 11, 2018

    Great article. I think the same analysis might apply to Joseph Campbell but don’t quote me on it. He was also accused of antisemitism and vulgar nationalist sympathies, yet he also popularized Eastern mysticism. There may even be a Rockefeller connection if you look hard enough. Most unfortunate that he turned out to be Agent 488 and not Agent 1488. Nice touch with the Sgt. Pepper.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Hipster Racist
    May 11, 2018

    Yet [sic] he continued the McCormick family’s war against unions.

    I lolled at the well-placed [sic] there…

    20th Century America can only be understood through the lens of the limited liability shareholder corporation. “Capitalism” (and “Communism” for that matter) is too ideological of a model for it to really fit. Corporations are both “individualist” and “collectivist” – both “capitalist” and “socialist.”

    Back in the 1960s both the left and the right could talk about “the liberalism of corporations like Xerox” and the academic left sometimes uses the term “neo-liberalism” but there’s nothing particularly “neo” about it.

    Once you understand the CIA as essentially a kind of paramilitary force for the corporate management class – in the 20th century exemplified by families like the Rockefellers – all of the social engineering, propaganda, and even bizarre crap like “MK Ultra” makes perfect sense.

    The New Right can look at the Frankfurt school and see how economic Marxism turned to “cultural Marxism” because – obviously – the Rockefellers weren’t going to pay these German Jews to form unions and promote class war against them. So the Frankfurt school – one trick ponies – just turned economic “Marxism class war” into cultural “Marxist class war” – where wealthy liberals like the Rockefellers could be on the “good” side fighting along side the “oppressed classes” … like … women, Blacks, and now the most oppressed class of all, trannies.

    That is the sort of class war a Rockefeller can get behind, because it not only doesn’t threaten their economic profits, it actually destroys organized labor AND gives them interesting oppressed people they can invite to their cocktail parties.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Hazelshade
      May 11, 2018

      “Yet [sic] he continued the McCormick family’s war against unions.”

      Vintage Rainer! “Protocols” is full of these.

      Liked by 1 person

    • eyeslevel
      May 11, 2018

      Leftism is a scam to put wordists -people who only produce words- in power. The wordist class includes professors, self styled “intellectuals”, lawyers, bureaucrats, journalists, teachers. To them, government exists to give them ever more wealth and power. They’re the modern priest class. They ally with the lower classes to oust the aristocracy, like the priest class has done throughout history, but they couldn’t care less about the working class. They’ve given up all pretense of being for the white working class. They maintain their power by their skillful use of propaganda and their control of the means of its dissemination.

      Eric Hoffer, an actual working man, said, “Under capitalism, we are expected to work for money. Under socialism, we are expected to work for words.” Since words are all socialists know how to produce, that is to be expected. When the intellectuals gained full control of the economy in the Soviet Union, they made life so miserable for the average worker they had to turn the whole country into a giant prison surrounded by walls and mines and barbed wire to keep people in and shoot anyone who tried to escape.

      Leftism has been in power in the US since 1930. Corporations have to go along with the existing power structure. The recent Starbucks incident illustrates this perfectly. Despite being uber-liberal, Starbucks is still part of the productive class, not the wordist class. So they must be expected to bow down to their leftist masters. Which they did.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Starbucked
        May 11, 2018

        If they can get a government handout, they’ll have a profitable new line of business.

        Like

      • Bob Whitaker is okay!
        May 15, 2018

        @eyeslevel
        You aren’t fully red pilled until you notice the right is just as anti-white as the left.

        The first thing Trump’s people did when they got power was ban all discussion of White Genocide on the White House website, which is illegal is it not? And the right are using lawfare to jail the Identity Europa people in Austria as we speak.

        “With the center collapsing we are a new generation. We are pro white, not pro right.” – Bob Whitaker

        Like

      • eyeslevel
        May 15, 2018

        @Bob Whitaker is okay!

        I never said the right was pro-white. But they’re not in power. Leftism is in power. Conservatism in its current form is fake opposition. It exists to protect leftism from anything that would really hurt it.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Bob Whitaker is okay!
        May 15, 2018

        @eyeslevel
        A repeater I see often from Fashies is a non-White becomes an “Honorary Aryan” if they agree with them on some issue.

        If the right was in power, White Genocide would still be occurring but it would be right wingers committing it, and the only difference to your comment is the names would be reversed.

        I don’t have time for righties OR lefties, because they are just as Wordist as each other. Bob said before he died, it is time to dump the right and he was right!

        Like

      • Bob Whitaker is okay!
        May 15, 2018

        The point I am trying to get at is, worrying about which wordist group holds power over another wordist group seem redundant, because both groups are wordists, and both are anti-White.

        Like

      • Hipster Racist
        May 15, 2018

        The Republicans – most of whom are self-described “conservatives” – control the entire federal government, the House of Representatives, the Senate, the Presidency, and the majority of the Supreme Court. The Republicans also control nearly 2/3rds of the state governments.

        Talking about “liberals” and “RINOs” is a distraction – the conservatives are anti-white, certainly, and are dedicated to serving the corporate oligarchy, which is fanatically anti-white.

        “Liberals” – if such things even exist these days – are irrelevant. Conservatives – the ideology and the people – are the problem. Anyone using the term “liberal” is typically trying to shift the blame away from the perps – conservatives.

        Liked by 1 person

      • icareviews
        May 15, 2018

        I get what you’re saying, but I wouldn’t go as far as to say that liberals are irrelevant. To the extent that there are white people who self-describe as liberals, subscribe to the incoherent “liberal” package of grab-bag ideology, and work to accelerate their own minority status and, ironically, destroy the possibility of the successful implementation of the liberal policies they claim to favor through their support for mass immigration, that is definitely a problem. I agree, though, that pundits on both sides who frame political problems in ideological rather than identitarian terms are intentionally misleading people; but liberal-brand whites who accuse conservative-brand whites of being “racists” are just as big a problem as conservative-brand whites who in turn accuse liberal-brand whites of being “the real racists”.

        Like

      • Hipster Racist
        May 16, 2018

        @icareviews

        We’re just moving into “no true Scotsman” territory here. Sure, “liberals” are pro-non-white immigration. They are “anti-racist” – meaning, anti-white.

        But Republicans are pro-non-white immigration. Conservatives are “anti-racist” – meaning anti-white.

        So why are “liberals” even being discussed? They are the minority. Far more Americans – especially White Americans – describe themselves as “conservatives” than “liberals.”

        The problem is not liberalism – the problem is conservativism. True, conservative rhetoric is less openly anti-white, which is why it is worse than liberalism – because it pretends to be “colorblind” when in reality it’s anti-white.

        So again why is anyone even discussing “liberals” – how are they even relevant? The conservative Republicans not just run the government, they run most of the corporations. They run most of the banks. For most of my lifetime, at least, the mayor of New York city has been a Republican. Wall Street is full of Republicans. The US military is mostly Republican, and mostly conservative.

        And ALL of those conservative Republicans are anti-white.

        So, again, why are “liberals” even being discussed? How are they relevant? Democrats don’t run jack except for a few crime-ridden cities.

        “True conservatives” are anti-white.

        Like

      • icareviews
        May 16, 2018

        I’ll give you a perfect example of why liberalism is relevant. At work, there’s a recently minted “diversity” hiring initiative, which means that the top boss’s strong preference is that managers hire non-whites when positions are open. None of the people in management are conservatives by any standard. These are true believers who buy into the party line hook, line, and sinker – whites need to atone for a history of evil oppression of non-whites, Russia literally controls America, global warming is the gravest challenge confronting the planet, and so forth, mass immigration and diversity are our greatest strength, etc. – not that any of these bosses actually want to live in a “diverse” neighborhood themselves, of course. But they do, at least on the conscious level, actually believe in the crap they spout. They want to believe. And the whites, overwhelmingly liberals, who work under them, think nothing of this at all, because they’re true believers, too. I sent an Alternative Hypothesis video to one of these liberals, a friend of mine going back several years, and he gets offended and quits watching because Alt-Hyp mentions MLK and the civil “rights” movement were basically running a scam on whites because blacks’ standard of living in America back in the 50s was actually higher than that of many people in Europe at the time. He acted like I’d sent him some child porn or something. My friend gets upset in an irrational way because package liberalism is essentially a religion and I blasphemed by taking the name of one of its gods in vain. This is why liberalism is a problem. It’s a suicide cult. At the corporate level, the promotion of compassionate leftism and mutated Marxism is of course disingenuous – but the faithful still believe.

        Like

      • Hipster Racist
        May 16, 2018

        @icareviews

        Let’s stop using the term “liberal” when we mean “anti-white.” I’d also suggest avoiding the terms “conservative” and “liberal” when we really mean “partisan Republican” and “partisan Democrat.”

        Numerous conservatives have told me that MLK was a conservative and he was, of course, a Republican. So how is MLK worship “liberal?” I think even Ann Coulter says that.

        “Diversity” is a mandate of international corporations, it’s a form of globalism and a way to undercut working class solidarity because a “diverse” working class can’t organize.

        @eyeswide is talking about “wordism” and the priest class. Well, we get our terms “right” vs. “left” from France pre-revolution. The “right” supported the King, the established Church, and the priests – a wordist institution if there was one.

        The “left” supported the newly emerging merchantile and technological classes – the opposite of wordists. They were the people actually doing shit, ruling by results, not words.

        As Confucius said, we need to rectify the names. If we are still going to use these term “right” and “left” – “conservative” and “liberal” – and I’m not suggesting we should, but if we are, we should at least get the definitions correct.

        “Global warming” has fuck all to do with race – being for “global warming” is one of those add-on “conservative” issues that gets tacked onto to pro-whiteness because people confuse pro-white with “conservative” – even though conservatives are anti-white.

        Similarly, being against “global warming” is one of those issues that gets tacked on to “liberalism” despite not even being a proper environmental issue and being supported by Goldman Sachs and the Wall Street “1%” – is that “leftist?” Is it even “liberal?”

        In every Western country save the USA the “Liberal” party is the equivalent of the American Republican party. As far as I can tell, the term “liberal” in the sense conservative Republicans use it was a term used by Southern segregationists used against Republicans. Somewhere between Nixon and Rush Limbaugh the term “liberal” took on its modern meaning in America. (Traditionally, “liberal” meant freedom of speech, religion, and free markets.)

        The Democratic party is increasingly simply the non-White party. Black Democrats are only anti-white incidentally, they are mostly just pro-Black. Same with all the other ethnic lobbies.

        The real anti-whites are a) Jews (who are white racially) b) those hypocritical whites who live in white neighborhoods and use anti-whiteness as a form of class warfare against working class whites.

        It is not due to “liberalism” that your employers are anti-white – it’s precisely the opposite of “liberalism” in both the traditional “classical liberal” sense of the term and even a more modern term.

        Call it, what “progressive?” It’s not even progressive. The actual progressive movement was Teddy Roosevelt and Margaret Sanger.

        Like

      • icareviews
        May 17, 2018

        “Somewhere between Nixon and Rush Limbaugh the term ‘liberal’ took on its modern meaning in America. (Traditionally, ‘liberal’ meant freedom of speech, religion, and free markets.)”

        Dude, now you’re just libertarian-semantics-posting and further confusing the issue. These people self-describe as liberals and most of our readers identify “liberalism” with the Democratic and liberal Republican pet causes enumerated above, so why this obsession with going back to some definition of liberalism that nobody but Mises nerds uses anymore?

        Also, as far as the climate change debate having no relevance to white nationalism, I would agree that liberal-vs.-conservative social and economic issues are for the most part secondary to the primacy of racial solidarity as the number one objective for us, but I would also counter that the “global warming” controversy has relevance to white racial interests since this push to lower CO2 emissions in the U.S. has gone hand-in-hand with industry leaving the U.S. and shifting their CO2 generation overseas:

        https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/4/18/15331040/emissions-outsourcing-carbon-leakage

        Like

      • Hipster Racist
        May 16, 2018

        @icareviews

        Let me put it this way:

        100% of conservatives I know a) worship MLK and Blacks who are “conservatives” like Bill Cosby because Cosby proves that Blacks can be Whites with brown skin, because Cosby lectured those low class Negroes to pull their pants up.

        Sure, Cosby raped a bunch of White women, but the conservatives assure me that it’s all a “liberal conspiracy” against Cosby because feminism and Hillary Clinton just wants to keep a honest Black man down.

        100% of conservative Republicans I know b) absolutely 100% support a Jewish Israel, believe Jews are God’s Chosen People and are chomping at the bit to fight more wars against Muslims for Israel. They love Trump BECAUSE Trump is pro-Israel, and Obama was a Secret Muslim that is anti-semitic and we need to start bombing Iran like yesterday. Also all of the conservatives want more non-white immigration as long as they are “conservatives.”

        How are these conservatives any better than your liberals?

        Like

      • icareviews
        May 17, 2018

        I didn’t mean to give the impression that I’m pro-conservative. I’m not. All conservatives do is consolidate and conserve the advances of liberalism. On the Israel front, Republicans are obviously worse than the Democrats. But rank-and-file conservatives at least have some good instincts about starting families, being self-reliant, and so forth. Rank-and-file average-Joe Republicans are against immigration, as well. That had a lot to do with Trump’s election, obviously. A lot of liberals are smarter people, but they’re just civilizationally suicidal from what I can tell. A lot of them actually WANT America to be inundated with foreigners and scorn anybody who doesn’t. I’m surrounded by these people everyday, so I speak from familiarity.

        Like

      • Bob Whitaker is okay!
        May 15, 2018

        @Hipster Racist
        What eyeslevel means by “power” is not donor money or getting elected, he is talking about the social power that only comes from meme warfare.

        Example: Everyone is terrified of being branded a racist, they think it is a real word instead of a meme, so they willingly enforce anti-White policy.

        In office, is not in power.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Hipster Racist
        May 16, 2018

        FOX News is the #1 TV channel, a huge presence on the web, and a major social influence. FOX News is certainly influential, and it’s very much conservative, right-leaning, and biased towards the Republicans.

        The Wall Street Journal is one of the most respected newspapers in the country, it’s conservative and leans Republican.

        If the conservative Republicans won’t use their influence and their power to be pro-white – you can’t blame the “liberals” or the Democrats. It’s the conservative Republicans that are anti-white, and use their power and influence to harm White people.

        Liberals and Democrats have zero to do with it.

        Anti-whites ARE in power, and those anti-white are mostly conservative Republicans.

        Like

      • eyeslevel
        May 16, 2018

        @Hipster

        In office is not in power. Leftism is in power Republicans cannot do anything important not approved of by their leftist masters.

        Like

      • Hipster Racist
        May 16, 2018

        @eyeslevel

        The ruling ideology in power in the West is not “leftist” in any recognizable way. It certainly isn’t anything close to the “class struggle” of Marxism. Racial unions – typically considered the main institution of “leftism” – have zero power anywhere. There are virtually zero nations anywhere in the world than are openly anti-capitalist.

        So where are these “leftists?” Sure, there are some college professors that are “leftists” – but they are the butt of jokes even to their students.

        I just don’t see any of this “leftism” anywhere. What I see is a right-wing, conservative, anti-white power structure that is mostly embedded in the Republican party. Nothing “leftist” about it – it’s all right wing – and anti-white.

        Like

      • icareviews
        May 16, 2018

        Me, I don’t see any of this rightism you’re talking about. You’re using a decades-old concept of leftism rather than the current, corporatist variation. If stomping for taxes to be cut or howling for war is your definition of “right-wing, conservative” politics, then sure. As far as I’m concerned, though, all of this can be classified as plutocracy, oligarchy, or parasitism, the preferred culture of which is that of the neo-Marxian left: freaky identity politics, physical mutilation, muh blacks and refugees, etc. Just because a policy is beneficial to high finance or the military-industrial complex doesn’t make it “right-wing” or “conservative”. The only thing being conserved is the profit margin.

        Like

      • eyeslevel
        May 16, 2018

        Yes, the whole thing is a kabuki show. Lefitsm is just a convenient term for “rule by intellectuals.”

        Like

      • eyeslevel
        May 16, 2018

        @HR

        Correct, what is called leftism is a scam to put “intellectuals” -the modern priest class- in power. They couldn’t care less about the working class or the environment or anything else they pretend to care about. They enforce the Religion of Political Correctness and engage in an inquisition to ruthlessly stamp out all heresy. The modern priest class is the wordist class -the group which only produces words for a living -lawyers, bureaucrats, journalists, professors, politicians. They use their skill with words to propagandize the people and justify giving themselves ever more money and power. The only reason for government to exist from their point of view is to give them ever more power and money. This is the group that is in power. The right, conservatives are fake opposition to this group.

        The modern priest class is running roughshod over the planet now totally out of control. The moral issue of our time is reining them in and returning them to their legitimate roles.

        Liked by 1 person

      • eyeslevel
        May 16, 2018

        You can blame “conservatives” for many things individually. You can blame them for being moral cowards and traitors. You can blame them for stabbing their voters in the back as soon as they take office election after election. But what you CAN’T blame them for is POLICY because THEY ARE NOT IN POWER. And they have no intention of ever taking power.

        Like

      • Bob Whitaker is okay!
        May 16, 2018

        @eyeslevel
        “And they have no intention of ever taking power.”

        This is one of the reasons I have lost patience with righties and fashies. You give them a sharp meme like white genocide, something they can use to prosecute their enemies and rule them. Instead of using it, they bleat and whine about being “replaced” and go back to losing.

        What is it about a left wing brain that it understands meme warfare, while a right wing brain can never comprehend it?

        I would rather have a lefty that is pro white than a rightie that is pro white, because the lefty will use our stuff and win.

        Like

      • Bob Whitaker is okay!
        May 16, 2018

        Righties don’t have any of the power you are talking about, because when it comes to political warfare they are born losers.

        Like

    • indravaruna
      May 13, 2018

      “So the Frankfurt school – one trick ponies – just turned economic “Marxism class war” into cultural “Marxist class war” – where wealthy liberals like the Rockefellers could be on the “good” side fighting along side the “oppressed classes” … like … women, Blacks, and now the most oppressed class of all, trannies.”

      Is quite funny how the CIA promoted cultural Leftism to defeat the economic Left, the economic Left is almost dead everywhere, unions are on their last legs and labor rights are being dismantled. Some important economist said that the 2008 crisis shouldn’t have being the end of Neoliberalism but the opposite happened.

      Like

      • Hipster Racist
        May 13, 2018

        @indravaruna

        There was of course the infamous “Council for Cultural Freedom” which promoted a form of “cultural leftism” to compete with the Communism of the USSR. There was also this trend of “individualism” in the Western world that was presumably compared favorably to the “collectivism” of Communism and Nazism, the two enemies of the West in that era.

        Pre-WWII, unions were fought via religious Christian groups like the Salvation Army – in fact, a little know fact is that the “fundamentalist” movement in the US was financed by the Lyman brothers, two oil executives from California that saw Christianity as a bulwark against unionization. But religion started to fall out of favor between the world wars, so you see the emergence of this “individualism” and “cultural leftism” that were – not at all coincidentally – compatible with “free markets” and promoted what we can now see clearly as consumerist behavior.

        When I was growing up “teenage rebellion” was literally a marketing category. Even I, as a kid, could see that those whining about “conformism” were some of the most conformist people around. If you wanted to rebel and “be different” there were pre-packaged identities you could adopt via dress and popular culture you could consume via music and movies.

        There was a supposed problem with “Generation Xers” who were “cynical” – so that itself became a marketing category, see OK Soda. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OK_Soda

        Liked by 2 people

  5. Hazelshade
    May 11, 2018

    I’ve done some reading on Allen Dulles and never found anything about Jung. Good finds.

    Awhile back I purchased an audiobook of some of Jung’s lectures. Disappointing. Boring with lots of watery generalities, like you said. I was expecting cool examples of astrology, ancient Egyptian symbolism, Aryan glory, etc. I figured it was me missing the significance, or something.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Pingback: Carl Jung’s Spooky Postwar Proto-Petersonism | Hipster Racist

  7. Hipster Racist
    May 11, 2018

    Just read the NYT article. It’s deja-vu all over again. 25 years ago White men were reading the Bell Curve and discussing race realism so the Usual Suspects created “HBD” to make sure than race realist discussion of IQ would be centered around how Jews and Asians are smarter than Whites.

    10 years ago White men were deconstructing progressivism elitism and even questioning the foundations of liberal Enlightenment thought, so along comes the Usual Suspect to act like Kevin MacDonald didn’t exist and gave us “the Dark Enlightenment” and “Neo-Reaction” where it was the “Cathedral” (surely not the “Synagogue”) that was forcing all this anti-whiteness.

    Now, post-Trump, there’s yet another rebranding: Curtis “Mencius Moldbug” Yarvin retired and the philo-semite Catholics at SocialMatter.net never really set the world on fire, so now we have the “Intellectual Dark Web” full of such brilliant minds as … Ben Shapiro? Come on, talk about affirmative action for Jews. I don’t have the hate-on for Peterson lots of people do, but really, he’s like Jack Donovan without all the “macho queer” stuff. I mean, really, “masculinity is all about honor and mastery.” Um, yeah, didn’t we all learn this in church youth group for boys at like, 12, when they were telling us about hair growing under our arms? Weinstein to tell us how political correctness is killing capitalism and Harris to explain to us the Dangers of Islam and why we must support Israel.

    So now the Jew York Times is telling us: this far, and no farther. You’re allowed to be all “politically incorrect” and even “reactionary” and “right wing” – as long as it’s all kosher and Jews run it and set the parameters.

    Fuck ’em.

    Liked by 2 people

    • guest
      May 11, 2018

      >Come on, talk about affirmative action for Jews.

      Fun anecdote, Lee Stranahan said how when he was at Breitbart, Shapiro had dibs on article ideas, so when they pitched stories, Shapiro would get to cherry pick and write the best ones.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Spy Vs Spy
      May 11, 2018

      The lower IQ spectrum for whites rapidly expanded in a few generations after the welfare state, desegregation and non-white migration began, Asians and Jews haven’t had the exposure to such dysgenic effects yet. Jews are starting to though, another 2 generations and Asians will also be affected in western nations. .

      If you go back to where whites didn’t have such dysgenic policy’s, Whites actually had a higher average IQ in comparison to both Jews and Asians. White USA and Australia policies both bear the same statistics, comparable to a rise and fall from grace.

      Just looking at the education standards that white boomers were able to successfully pass is astounding compared to today. Ask any 13 year old American or Australian, about Captain Cook or Christopher Columbus, and they would have no idea of there accomplishments. Literally parents have to teach their children to read and do maths, even if they go to full time public schooling. Teachers don’t even assign homework any more… pathetic it really is.

      It’s sad.

      It’s good to know who the enemies are now, it took a few years to flush them all out , it’s happened.

      Like

    • indravaruna
      May 13, 2018

      The conservatives writers for the NYT are Neocon jews like David Brooks (son serving in the IDF) and the Brett Stephens who worked for Israeli newspapers and WSJ.

      Is no exaggeration to say that Jews are doing all the opinion forming in America.

      Liked by 1 person

  8. Hipster Racist
    May 11, 2018

    The core members have little in common politically. Bret and Eric Weinstein and Ms. Heying were Bernie Sanders supporters. Mr. Harris was an outspoken Hillary voter. Ben Shapiro is an anti-Trump conservative.

    Wow, what an intellectually “diverse” group there! Left wing Jews that voted for Bernie Sanders and Clinton, and a Republican Jew that hates Trump. They have really covered all the bases!

    Liked by 2 people

  9. bob saffron
    May 11, 2018

    Blubbering for the camera is apparently cathartic.

    Like

    • icareviews
      May 12, 2018

      At least the subject matter seems to warrant emotion in this case. Getting teary-eyed and trembly-voiced over a tragic death is a lot different from doing the same thing over the abstract plight of the individual in the collective.

      Like

  10. bob saffron
    May 11, 2018

    And amusing (01:55).

    Like

  11. Spy Vs Spy
    May 12, 2018

    Good 9/11 truth vid.

    Liked by 2 people

  12. Jo Jo
    May 17, 2018

    Why is this information being produced?

    Liked by 1 person

    • icareviews
      May 18, 2018

      Oddly, my HillaryBro liberal weenie friend at work has been sending me Jordan Peterson stuff of late. I guess it makes him feel naughty and edgy or something, which I admittedly have to view as an improvement over him sending me Samantha Bee clips.

      Like

    • icareviews
      May 18, 2018

      Nice tie-in with this post, since Red Ice notes the “vast number of references to Jung, Freud, and Plato.” I called it!

      Like

  13. Pingback: Carl the Cuck, Continued | Aryan Skynet

  14. Pingback: Channers accuse Jordan Peterson | vulture of critique

Leave a Reply - Your Comment WILL be Moderated.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: