Jew World Order

by Niflson’s Mind

Demonization has been a very common practice in human history. Almost every single person on this planet, who has the basic capacity to communicate with others, has been both the object and promoter of its impressive legacy. The origin of the term ‘demon’ is somewhat unknown to most people so I think it is crucial to at least have some context before we delve into the rhetorical aspect of this article.

A demon, in its original conception, had nothing to do with evil or ‘unclean’ spirits. The daimon in the ancient world, as the term was defined at the time (and thus utilized by the likes of Plato), was simply an ‘alter ego’ of sorts which found expression in human endeavors related to art and creativity. As a matter of fact, the term genius is the Latin version of this exact concept/term and sustains today the same connotation demon had in the pre-christian world (it is no coincidence that genius is related to the famous genie of Islamic tradition). Ironically, the term demon itself has been the object of ‘demonization’ to the point were culturally most people today apply the much later definition of it.

With the advent of a new and radical theological narrative, the demon became a symbol of everything that is chaotic, vile, and unclean. Countless nightmares were attributed to their influence and many a powerful presence in Nature received the accusation. By medieval times in Europe, almost anything unknown, ugly or mysterious was automatically perceived as either being demonic or at least influenced by a host of them. Thousands of people, animals and even inanimate objects were subjected to exorcisms to somehow remove the dark influence of these entities. It is from this somewhat silly episode in our past history that we begin to also see the utilization of the demonic accusation against those we disagreed with in almost any subject. Catholics saw Protestants as demonic and the same was true in the reverse. Of course, during this time many of the accusers (and the objects of it) took these threats seriously and literally, thus the term wasn’t simply a style of argument but a dramatic conclusion that could hold terminal consequences.

By the time of the Enlightenment, and later on the industrial revolution, the term itself may have lost its ‘edginess’ but it most definitely continued to describe those out-groups we rejected. To be clear, this tendency to reject ideas and people via language (with all the ancillary elements that come with it) is absolutely normal and healthy. It serves the basic animal need to mark clear boundaries between ‘friend and foe’. Whether or not the supernatural element to this survival tendency is healthy or even useful is irrelevant to the point of this discussion, albeit a very interesting one for another time. Also, the reasons for this term’s transmutation from a positive (or at least neutral) meaning to a clearly caricaturesque version of itself is quite interesting as well but not the object of this article. Nonetheless, it is important to understand the fact of this change to the idea of demonization itself because it exemplifies that language is a dynamic and morphing mechanism of communication that must be seen by our movement as a tool and not as a virgin in need of shielding.

How does demonization work in the political field? It serves the purpose of easily disposing of entire ideas and the groups that espouse them in a quick manner without having to enter into the complex field of explanation and deconstruction. Most people who engage in practical politics are not educated enough to battle with anyone regarding their own sincerely held beliefs (since it would require rhetorical skills that most people do not develop in their regular lives), never mind getting into the cobwebs of argument. The average man/woman can justify their own views quite easily to themselves and those who respect them enough to listen without disagreement, but when these same folks attempt to enter into the combative field of debate, their own feeling of inadequacy on the practice will usually place them at a disadvantage. A good case in point is the huge amount of people who have attempted to explain themselves on talk shows to no avail, even when very educated on the matter. The pressure to simplify a complex message in front of a battering ram of insults is almost impossible to even the most sophisticated interlocutor.

Therefore, demonizing your opponent ‘ab initio’ (from the start) allows you the flexibility of communicating, to those you wish to persuade, a generalized view of the opposition well encapsulated within easy phrases that exploit their preconceived notions of said group/idea. As we all know, radical egalitarians (what people call Marxists, Liberals, etc) and all of their capitalist advocates in the powerful corporate media, have used this strategy very effectively against all White people who profess any type of ethnically aware political identity. Terms like nazi, racist, fascist, hater, ignorant, and a myriad of others have been thrown at us without any expectation of having to explain them. Most of these system worshiping egalitarian hippie freaks (see where I’m going with this?) would be stunned into a partially retarded stupor if they were forced to explain what any of these demonizing terms actually mean. It is almost guaranteed that they will define these terms with additional adjectives (i.e. “racist means you are a hater”, “fascist means you are a racist”, etc). Their incapacity to explain these epithets is in fact obvious proof that they are indeed brainwashed imbeciles who only parrot their masters narrative. But as any science fiction fan can confirm, robots make awesome warriors in most stories, and in this war we are waging they have done an excellent job repeating their Anti-White programming to the point of pushing us into the defensive. This must end today and we must play their game.

Why do these techniques work?

The truth is that most demonizing strategies are predicated on some collective perception of the group or idea that has already become part of popular culture (how is another subject entirely!). As an example, most “fascist” believe in discipline and order, thus they can easily be described negatively by their enemies as “square” or “up-tight”. Racists are exclusivists (i.e. they like their own people and wish to exclude those that are dissimilar to protect them), on the same vein this can be seen by those excluded as “hating”, just like a cockroaches consider it “hating” when you clean your house and deprive them of trash to lay their eggs in. Always remember that demonizing can only work if it is founded on stereotypical premises, which are themselves based on some level of truth, even if superficial.

In the same vein, it is fair to say that most ‘liberals’ are generally viewed as under-showered hippie types who do drugs, are cowardly wimps, live with their parents (or are supported by them), are foolishly utopian, advocate degenerate sexual lifestyles, and are world class hypocrites (i.e. anarchists that force the general population to keep in step with the values of the system). These perceptions are thus ripe for us to point out, simplify and exaggerate. Hippie degenerate bums, like the ones in the antifa crowd, who, after their protesting, go back to their privileged university dorms and boast about their fight against “the system”, are pathetic losers and everybody feels it. We simply must point it out with dramatic language. Terms like “communist”, “hippie”, “degenerate”, “freak”, “wimp”, “fag”, “hypocrite”, “bum”, “junkie”, “liberal”, “tree-huger”, “free-loader” and many others, will highlight the popularly held perceptions of their weaknesses. Also, underlining or amplifying the faults of most of the followers of these ideologies is effective because most people are simple minded enough to asses the value of an idea on the quality of the representative of it (even though this is actually irrelevant, specially in a culture where anybody feels free to proclaim themselves anything they wish without the shame of actually being quizzed on it).

So, if you see a fat lesbian advocating for equal rights, point out that sexual deviants with eating disorders tend to say such things. It may sound “rude” to your bourgeois sensibilities but it must be done. This must not be directed at the portly dyke directly but instead directed at the audience who is consuming the information. Always remember the purpose of this. Don’t ever feel any remorse on indirectly causing any “psychological” harm on these robots, they do exactly the same thing to our less attractive brethren when they appear on TV or on newspapers. Understand that our enemies have never felt any compassion whatsoever when it comes to ridiculing a White Racialist, his family, his children, his eating habits, his tastes in clothing, hygiene, and/or anything else to which they can latch on and directly associate with our views. Again, we must play the same game, always being watchful to never cross into the bully category (or we will be thus demonized in that fashion later). Remember, a skinny mongrelized coke whore with a lisp, who screams against racism in a political rally, will never be effectively demonized as a “bully” (she is a ‘certified victim’ after all) but a tough looking “skinhead” type (or a “redneck”) will. We therefore use this technique intelligently and not absurdly. Remember always that our demonization is aimed at the White masses and not at the scum who oppose us openly. They are lost cases for the most part and engaging them in any way will only devolve into an insult match to no avail.

When you inject these derisive descriptors regarding our opposition into your daily conversations (about politics or any related matter), most people will not argue against them but instead store the ‘demon seed’ as a nugget of truth or as an opinionated description of the views alluded to. Next thing you know this seed will grow into a full demon and the natural tendency of people to simplify and categorize will do the rest of the job for you to the point in which our enemies’ views will become grown monsters of cataclysmic proportions. Their views will slowly become anathematized to the point of open ridicule, which is exactly what we seek.

I strongly believe that our demonization can and will be more effective than theirs in the end. After all, it is way cooler to be a “hater” than a “hippie wimp”. Their demonization involves the critique of all that is virile, strong, masculine, and natural. Ours degrade values which advocate sickness, weakness, effeminacy, and unnatural views of the world.

The time is now to slowly engage ourselves in the process of devaluing this corrupt system’s narrative. The egalitarian mob who fight us are in fact the drones/slaves of the system they purport to despise. They openly police and enforce the politically correct values of the corporate elites who rule this country and the entire world. They advocate a mono-culture without differences (an impossibility) because the system has brainwashed them into thinking that this will somehow eliminate “injustice”, “prejudice” and “violence” (natural aspects of life). Meanwhile, their corporate overlords utilize all the resources possible to continue feeding the Idiot Cultural Factories we call the mainstream media and Hollywood. Together in their unholy marriage, they continue eroding borders, races, cultures, and languages (the foundations of healthy identity and true diversity), making it easier for them to sell their crappy disease laden products to a uniform population. If we wish to save our race and every single species on this Earth, we must fight these lunatics with all of our energy. They are definitely true modern day demons and we must banish them from our lands with all of our righteous might.

In war, almost anything is fair game, and besmirching the character of our enemies is more than just. We must thus proclaim loudly like Ramiro Ledesma, a hero and martyr of the Spanish Civil War and founder of National-Sindicalist philosophy: ¡No Parar Hasta Conquistar! (Never Stop Until We Conquer)