/lit/ - Literature

Why did modernist and postmodernist American literature take such an angsty gen-X 1990s turn so early? Is it the Jewish influence? Every fucking thing is
>Bet you think things are great here in Suburbia... Well I got news for you kiddo they ain't... America was never great... All men are created equal? Puh lease. What about women and niggers and the indians? The Mayflower was already a festering wound. This country was founded on the blood of the Stonewall gayniggers. America is all shopping malls and TV and the Constitution? Yea right.... More like one nation DIVISIBLE.

Like I fucking get it already, shut up god damnit. It's the most Jewish neurotic "everything has a seedy underbelly" whining I've ever heard and it's been maintained nonstop for most of a century now. What happened to talking about how big the desert is or how nice the forest is

>>19717114
>American Tabloid
>postmodernist
never go full retard

>>19717129
I said modernist and postmodernist to indicate all post-war literature and a lot of pre-war literature too. Could you answer my question instead of proving that only illiterate faggots read this hack?

>>19717114
>What happened to talking about how big the desert is or how nice the forest is
Ellroy writes about crime in the city, not about deserts or forests.

>>19717139
>I said modernist and postmodernist to indicate all post-war literature and a lot of pre-war literature too
That's not what postmodernism is.
>Could you answer my question instead of proving that only illiterate faggots read this hack?
There's nothing literary in your post to begin with. It's a shallow complaint about a particular point of view. Also, you sound like a /pol/tard with muh jews.

>>19717140
But that's my point, why does the postmodern afterglow of American literature have nothing to say other than cynical whining? Why could this book be algorithmically generated from a bunch of other 1990s books?

You can write about crime in the city from a perspective that isn't so whiny. There are even ways to write about grunge and underbellies that aren't gen-X pomo whining about how nothing is what it was said to be in school. This kind of preachy interlude reads kitschy now, and I bet it already did in the 90s too if you were paying attention.

>>19717152
Kill yourself faggot.

>>19717197
>>19717114
It comes off as whiny because of how disingenuous and petty much of it is. They're very shallow critiques using arguments already made in the 60s and in such a way that reifies ascendant jewish and liberal narratives. It's new power criticizing old power to legitimize itself, not dissidents criticizing the current power.

>>19717197
>You can write about crime in the city from a perspective that isn't so whiny.
It'd be boring. Also, this is only the prologue. Actual book is kino.
>gen-X pomo
Ellroy is a literal boomer.
>This kind of preachy interlude reads kitschy now, and I bet it already did in the 90s too if you were paying attention.
Disagree. America was indeed always fucked up. Not sure what you even.

>>19717114
A portion of the population possess a character trait likely genetic likely developed before humans but mainted it's use through primitive and tribal ages, relatively small villages and what not; to be a grand mediator, to desire peace and harmony in the immediate family unit (mature responsible leadership) and nessecarily peace and harmony between all the family units; to best ensure the survival and we'll being of the individual, the family and the tribe.

In the modern day the awareness of society as a whole, the massive unit of family units, provokes individuals with these genetic proclivities of being mediators, peace keepers and harmonizers; are understandably irked by the challenges in peace keeping and mediating they are made aware of in the national and international village called the cutting edge world

>>19717215
>They're very shallow critiques using arguments already made in the 60s
There isn't any 'critique'. Just observation.
>jewish and liberal narratives
So you're basically just a seething /pol/tard?

>>19717233
Seems like you're the only one seething here, I'm just talking about post 60s American culture.

>>19717224
>book has "Alright before I even start this crime novel, let me tell you how America is the land of the UNfree #voteblue" prologue that you admit is distinct from the actual book contents
This is even worse than just being consistently preachy

>Ellroy is a literal boomer
Are you even keeping up with the conversation, that is what the original post said. This attitude is very old, it's like the shallow cynicism of the 1990s has been building up for a century.

>>19717251
You're not the one seething? So you're not this guy? >>19717114 This faggot is seething like some woman in her period.

>>19717266
I responded to his post with mine, learn to use 4chan. And he might be mad but he's basically right anyway.

>>19717258
>book has "Alright before I even start this crime novel, let me tell you how America is the land of the UNfree #voteblue" prologue that you admit is distinct from the actual book contents
Huh? You couldn't be further from the truth. Not even sure how anyone can come up with such a distorted interpretation.

>>19717274
>And he might be mad but he's basically right anyway.
He sounds like a schizo seething /pol/tard who sees the past with rose-tinted glasses. 'things were always lovely and good!!! don't you dare to say otherwise!!!' I don't see his point because he doesn't have one.
Also:
>mad
Are you black? Who uses mad to mean angry?

>>19717299
>Are you black? Who uses mad to mean angry?

>>19717304
It's okay, Jamal. There's a speech code you don't know.

>>19717299
Not what he's saying at all, you just have lightswitch brain. He's attacking the argument being made on the grounds that they're whiny, jewish, and gay, which is true. That doesn't mean he's saying the past was good. The past led to gay neoliberal purple dildo parade tranny zionist society.

>>19717114
>>19717139
>>19717197
This is what you sound like.
>>19717299
You went full retard.

>>19717370
What arguments? Do you know what an argument is? There's not a single argument here, just a jaded observation.
>using jewish as a negative adjective
seething /pol/tard detected

Immigration good! Except that one time...

>>19717393
You're literally just projecting, I attach no connotation of my own to the word Jewish here, I'm merely using it as a descriptor.
>UHM THAT'S AN OBSERVATION NOT AN ARGUMENT
uhhh okay whatever you fucking fag lmao thanks for contributing to the conversation, great input

>filtered by the first lines of a historical fiction novel
do /lit/lets really...?

>>19717410
>You're literally just projecting, I attach no connotation of my own to the word Jewish here, I'm merely using it as a descriptor.
How can you 'attack' an argument for being Jewish if you don't think Jewish is a negative adjective?
>uhhh okay whatever you fucking fag lmao thanks for contributing to the conversation, great input
As opposed to crying about le Jewish for the 19238218932189th time? Truly a great contribution.

>>19717435
You know what you're actually right, I would've been far better off saying he's 'describing the observations as' instead of 'attacking the arguments as'.
>As opposed to crying about le Jewish for the 19238218932189th time?
jewish influence on culture can be an interesting topic if you stop freaking out and trying to police people when it comes out, it's just as annoying as spergs wailing about what villains they are.

>>19717453
No one is 'policing' the shit you say. But when you throw around 'Jewish' as a negative adjective, don't be surprised when people question you. What is even jewish about book? I didn't know Jews had invented pessimism. How is this book's worlview jewish but yours isn't? Are you sure you aren't jewified? ;)

>>19717479
The dissolution of native cultures IS jewish culture, not pessimism. And this is not an opinion.

>>19717479
Never read the book, just responded to his general criticism of post-war American literature when you sprang into action to make sure nobody says anything bad about jews (for some reason).

>>19717518
sorry OBSERVATIONS not criticisms SORRY EVERYONE

>>19717510
>The dissolution of native cultures IS jewish culture
I guess that makes the English settlers in North America a bunch of Jews. After all, dissolution of native cultures is what they're famous for. As you can see, America was never innocent and was always Jewish.

>>19717531
So you think that jews are performing an act of dominations and conquest on American whites similar to what they did to the indians?

>>19717556
No, I never mentioned the present day. You said 'dissolution of native cultures IS jewish culture.' I simply used your logic to a particular historical event.

>>19717585
I don't know if they're the same thing but you'd agree that's an act of racial conquest?

>>19717531
>I guess that makes the English settlers in North America a bunch of Jews.
No, they're just conquerors and colonizers like every other culture, including native americans who were raping and killing each other before we ever got here, including jewish culture before the fall of the second temple and the rise of rabbinic judaism. Jewish anxiety is a well known phenomenon among jews, and it's this sick culture that liberalism spreads.

You should have looked at what Henry Miller had to say about America in the 1930's when he was basically the hottest shit novelist, and look at all the ultra-pessimistic noir films made in that period.

The US was never this innocent utopia, but Americans love to forget that.

>>19717635
>but Americans love to forget that.
Nobody thinks this. Everybody thinks the US was le evil slaveholder empire that didn't even gibe women and blacks le right to vote. That's the actually dominant narrative.

>>19717618
Dissolution of native cultures is Jewish culture, that's what that guy said. Anglos are Jewy in their ways, using this logic. I don't see how this wouldn't be the case. Also, there's nothing innocent about conquest and genocide, which means America was never innocent. Literally all your whines about this book's first lines are nonsense.

>>19717642

The dominant narrative is a nearly completely ahistorical society living for the moment or next big scheme and comercialism, comercialism, comercialism.

I mentioned the 1930's and big depression because the brightest minds of US literature came from that period, and they all warned Americans were becoming savage brutalized beasts in the context of the great depression.

Then came suburbia and the neuroticism you mention, but it was all borne out of the seedy belly of "might or right" of the depression. Even later popular works like the tv show Mad Men get this is great innovation of America with the transition to comercial psychological manipulation.

>>19717654
>Anglos are Jewy in their ways, using this logic
Anglo-liberal culture was always susceptible to jewish influence, yes, but the conquest of the americas and forced assimilation and killing of natives has absolutely nothing to do with subversion.
>there's nothing innocent about conquest and genocide
It's literally the most innocent, primal thing,the foundation of life, before any notion of language there's rape.

>>19717686
>The dominant narrative is a nearly completely ahistorical society living for the moment or next big scheme and comercialism, comercialism, comercialism.
No, it isn't, that's now how Americans see America. That's not the story that's told in media, in public education, or in arts generally. Now it might be TRUE to some extent, there's merit to that narrative, but that's not the dominant narrative in American culture.

>>19717723
not how* Americans see America*

>>19717686
>The dominant narrative is a nearly completely ahistorical society living for the moment or next big scheme and comercialism, comercialism, comercialism.
We're not in the rara 80s anymore, the dominant narrative is the 1619 Project, our jewish masters will gladly fuck with their quarter profits if it'll further their demoralization agenda.

>>19717691
>Anglo-liberal culture was always susceptible to jewish influence, yes, but the conquest of the americas and forced assimilation and killing of natives has absolutely nothing to do with subversion.
I don't see the difference. Dissolution is dissolution. Both are equally as malignant. Whether you use weapons and murder or 'subversion', it doesn't matter.
>It's literally the most innocent, primal thing,the foundation of life, before any notion of language there's rape.
It'd be innocent if it were an end in and of itself. But when there's greed and ambition and evil, it's as a corrupt as anything else. You're just trying to erroneously justify English settlers for some reason, maybe sympathy.

>>19717114
Lmfao fucking based.

>>19717723
>>19717736

I am not an American, but Jesus, you guys have the shortest term memory. America is going through another Great Depression era like cycle.

Look at what was happening in the 1930's with those huge capitalist magnates and monopolies. The complete ironic and pessimistic noir culture hanging at the time overhead, the little man trying to scrape by with schemes and reading Superman.

The obvious refference in all times of crisis for a culture is back to beggining, if it was good or bad. All this culture wars shit turned from the intellectual masturbation that was in the 90's into shitfest today because you are unable to refform your society at a fundamental level and don't have any actual leaders apart from the deep state.

>>19717737
>I don't see the difference
The difference is between the natural act of a culture superorganism rightfully asserting it's right to exist and a plague killing it's host and itself, offering nothing in return, like the dysgenic jew. Natives weren't dissolved, they were raped, killed and assimilated, the dissolution of native culture only happened after they got on government programs and became functional niggers.
>if it were an end in and of itself
And it was, it was conquest. The same conquest of the Aztecs, the Comanches, of the Zulu and the Han. Your spooks of "greed", "ambition" or "evil" are meaningless slave morality subversions of the success of that conquest.

>>19717761
I don't know how you think that's in contradiction to anything being said. You seem to be trying to suss out some kind of narrative to describe narrative accurately, we are talking about the INTERNAL CONVERSATION in America and how it misses the mark and why that is. You're agreeing with us but getting confused. This time very like the 1970s also btw, in that it's economically depressed and mired in pessimism and political radicalism.

>>19717794
to describe America* accurately. fuck me I need to proofread my posts better

Never read any Elroy. Is he even good?

>>19717768
>The difference is between the natural act of a culture superorganism rightfully asserting it's right to exist and a plague killing it's host and itself, offering nothing in return
As I was reading this, I had literally no idea which was which until you specified it a bit near the end. You make Anglos and Jews sound equally as parasitic and evil but insist they're different somehow.
> And it was, it was conquest. The same conquest of the Aztecs, the Comanches, of the Zulu and the Han. Your spooks of "greed", "ambition" or "evil" are meaningless slave morality subversions of the success of that conquest.
No, Anglos had clear pre-set ambitions, just like the Jews, and were greedy, just like the jews. An innocent animal will act out of natural impulses, not out of preconceived plans. The only difference between jews and anglos is your own personal bias.

>>19717821
Yes, one of the best living writers.

>>19717834
>parasitic and evil but insist they're different somehow
It's the difference between dissolution and conquest, stop with the slave morality and stop with this artificial post-hoc dualism between natural impulses and preconceived plans.

>>19717834
You are implying that Aztecs, Comanche, Han, and Zulu are innocent animals acti g on natural impulses.

Super racist much?

>>19717891
Both methods of destroying a culture are master morality or none are. End justifies the means, etc. Also, you were the one who brought up 'innocence' to mean some primal thing.

>>19717909
No, I never really mentioned any of those cultures, I was talking about the second part of the reply.

>>19717912
>Both methods of destroying a culture are master morality or none are.
No, jewish subversion runs on the slave morality you exhibit. This is Nietzsche/nazism/nationalism 101, retard.

>>19717479
>The Jew is immunized against all dangers: one may call him a scoundrel, parasite, swindler, profiteer, it all runs off him like water off a raincoat. But call him a Jew and you will be astonished at how he recoils, how injured he is, how he suddenly shrinks back: “I’ve been found out.”

>>19717982
Nietzsche despised anti-semitism and nationalism. I'm not sure why would you conflate these different worldviews. And no, Jews being in power via cunning and skills is not slave morality but master morality. Slave morality would be like those whiny wannabe nazis online who think Jews are le bad, in the most simple moralistic outlook.

>>19718010
>WE ARE THE BEST, THE STRONGEST, WE ARE THE ÜBERMENSCH
>also these clearly inferior Jews are absolutely defeating us so we need to exterminate them all!!
Nazis were such a comedic contradiction.

>>19718071
Nazis are irrelevant, Israel won't survive the next 20 years. Every Muslim nation hates Jews a thousand times more than any European ever did.

>>19718024
>Jews being in power via cunning and skills is not slave morality but master morality.
So you admit jews are in power, exhibiting master morality while agipropping slave morality in their serfs, using it to disqualifying white history.
This is the common nazi viewpoint, not slave morality judgements about jewish intentions.

>>19718106
Hitler indirectly created Israel, so another Nazi relic will die but I highly doubt it. Israel will prevail because they have both the US and Europe on their side.

>>19718110
The Nazi viewpoint is more like "Jews are le bad because they won't let me play! They are strong and weak at the same time!" Nazi types tend to have a double standard regarding control. When they do it, it's perfectly noble and fair game, but when it's done onto them, then it's evil and 'subversive'. They're like the childhood friend who was a sore loser so he invented ridiculous pretexts. Also, not sure what you mean by 'disqualifying white history', but James Ellroy is being perfectly fair in his observation of America, albeit a bit blunt and pessimistic.

>>19718146
Again with slave morality judgements...

>>19718146
You mean people like being in control of their own society but don't like it when outsiders take over? Whoa...

>>19718201
I'm saying Nazi types are contradictory, not to say hypocritical. They want to play the master morality game, but deep down they are slave moralists.

>>19718117
>Hitler indirectly created Israel
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration
>The declaration was contained in a letter dated 2 November 1917 from the United Kingdom's Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour to Lord Rothschild, a leader of the British Jewish community, for transmission to the Zionist Federation of Great Britain and Ireland.

Churchill created Israel because he was the servant of the Jewish financiers who had controlled England through the Bank of London for a long time.

>The founding of the Bank of England by William Patterson and his friends in 1694 is one of the great dates in history. . . . It early became clear that gold need be held on hand only to a fraction of the certificates likely to be presented for payment. . . . In effect the creation of paper claims greater than the reserves available means that bankers were creating money out of nothing. The same thing could be done in another way. Deposit bankers discovered that orders and cheques drawn against deposits by depositors and given to a third person were often not cashed by the latter but were deposited in their own accounts. Accordingly it was necessary for the bankers to keep on hand in actual money no more than a fraction of deposits likely to be drawn upon and cashed, the rest could be used for loans, and if these loans were made by creating a deposit (account) for the borrower, who in turn would draw cheques upon it rather than withdraw money, such “created deposits” or loans could also be covered adequately by retaining reserves to only a fraction of their value. Such created deposits were also a creation of money out of nothing. . . . William Patterson however, on obtaining the Charter of the Bank of England in 1694, said: “the bank hath benefit of interest on all moneys which it creates out of nothing.”
(continued)

>>19718206
Jews are not outsiders. Maybe they were at some point but they're naturals now. Same with Anglo Americans. Also, the West has gone full multicultural. Nazi types always talk about le genocide, but what I'm seeing is a suicide.

>>19718236
(continuing)
>The merchant bankers of London had already at hand in 1810-1850 the Stock Exchange, the Bank of England, and the London money market when the needs of advancing industrialism called all of these into the industrial world which they had hitherto ignored. In time they brought into their financial network the provincial banking centers, organized as commercial banks and savings banks, as well as insurance companies, to form all of these into a single financial system on an international scale which manipulated the quantity and flow of money so that they were able to influence, if not control, governments on one side and industries on the other. The men who did this, looking backward toward the period of dynastic monarchy in which they had their own roots, aspired to establish dynasties of international bankers and were at least as successful at this as were many of the dynastic political rulers. The greatest of these dynasties, of course, were the descendants of Meyer Amschel Rothschild (1743-1812) of Frankfort, whose male descendants, for at least two generations, generally married first cousins or even nieces. Rothschild's five sons, established at branches in Vienna, London, Naples, and Paris, as well as Frankfort, cooperated together in ways which other international banking dynasties copied but rarely excelled.

>The influence of financial capitalism and of the international bankers who created it was exercised both on business and on governments, but could have done neither if it had not been able to persuade both these to accept two "axioms" of its own ideology. Both of these were based on the assumption that politicians were too weak and too subject to temporary popular pressures to be trusted with control of the money system; accordingly, the sanctity of all values and the soundness of money must be protected in two ways: by basing the value of money on gold and by allowing bankers to control the supply of money. To do this it was necessary to conceal, or even to mislead, both governments and people about the nature of money and its methods of operation.

>In addition to their power over government based on government financing and personal influence, bankers could steer governments in ways they wished them to go by other pressures. Since most government officials felt ignorant of finance, they sought advice from bankers whom they considered to be experts in the field. The history of the last century shows, as we shall see later, that the advice given to governments by bankers, like the advice they gave to industrialists, was consistently good for bankers, but was often disastrous for governments, businessmen, and the people generally. Such advice could be enforced if necessary by manipulation of exchanges, gold flows, discount rates, and even levels of business activity.
- Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope

>>19718217
>deep down they are slave moralists
How?

>>19718236
>Anglos and Jews helping each other
Like I said, there's no difference and I'm not sure how much delusion one needs to say they are not the same.

>>19718243
Jews are very hostile towards gentiles and always seek to take over gentile societies and twist them to their own ends. They only seem "naturals" to you because they've done a good job of erasing their presence.

>Also, the West has gone full multicultural.
Because of jews.

>>19718252
Anglos have a minority of shitty people. Jews are a minority of shitty people.

Most Englishmen are ordinary joes. Most Jews despise non-Jews and view them as natural slaves.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqbUqW_V70Y

>>19718261

>>19718249
Their rhetoric against Jews is that of a slave moralist. They said/say Jews are morally bad because they are 'subversive' and 'dissolve cultures' and 'pervert values', etc. If they were true master moralists, they wouldn't express so much resent and moral indignation. They would simply be on top, naturally, or accept that the ones on top have earned their place. Those would be the logical ends of a master moralist.

>>19718281
Do you ever get tired of posting this same pilpul every day? Do you think this is really going to make people, after seeing something like >>19718269, think "wtf I love jews now, they must be really strong and cool if they can lie openly and manipulate people like Barbara Lerner Specter!"

>>19718281
This is not the nazi claim, and this is also not what master morality means. The nazi claim you unwillingly stumbled into earlier and agree because it's factual, and now have to doublethink your way out of.
>They would simply be on top, naturally, or accept that the ones on top have earned their place
This is not the meaning of master morality.

>>19718261
>Jews are very hostile towards gentiles and always seek to take over gentile societies and twist them to their own ends.
Doesn't sound so different from English settlers from back then.
>>Also, the West has gone full multicultural.
>Because of jews
If Europeans can be easily manipulated by Jews, maybe, just maybe, they aren't as strong as they think they are. Whoever wins the game, is the victor. The loser will invent pretexts if he's a sore loser.
>>19718296
This is just the impotent rage of a dying culture. Nazi types know the rules but they don't like that what they perceive as 'their side' is losing.

>>19718303
I never said that was the meaning of master morality, I said those would be the results of being a master moralist.

>>19718316
>Whoever wins the game, is the victor.
Can't wait to see you tomorrow talking about morality and multiculturalism again you shapeshifting faggot. Just like the Trotskyists who founded neoconservatism could believe whatever was expedient at the time.

You people are fucked up.

>>19718316
English settlers did not migrate into an existing society and then start stealthily subverting it from within.

>If Europeans can be easily manipulated by Jews, maybe, just maybe, they aren't as strong as they think they are.
Or maybe manipulation is the one thing jews are good at, and the one thing that Europeans are vulnerable to. It's obvious that Europeans have made the greatest advancements in human history.

>>19718324
>those would be the results of being a master moralist
How?

>>19718296
>wtf I love jews now, they must be really strong and cool if they can lie openly and manipulate people like Barbara Lerner Specter!
I mean, if they can lie and trick without repercussion and that really tells you who's boss. Resentful slave moralists like the Nazi types just can't fight at the same pace as the Jews and with the same sophisticated techniques and methods. Jews outmatched Europeans in the power game long ago. And all Europeans did was pull their pants down and take it. That is what happened and what keeps happening. The modern European psyche is weak, defeated, and suicidal and they have no one to blame but themselves. That is the truth.

>>19718356
>this is a jew trying to make jews look good

>>19718326
I'm right-wing, not a commie. I dislike multiculturalism and globohomo but I admit that as far as cultural warfare is concerned, Jews are ripping Europe a new asshole. You can't expect me to have pity and sympathy for Europe when they are the ones killing themselves. I look at a place like Sweden and I spit on it.

>>19718356
You're right, jews do all deserve to be genocided.

>>19718316
>Doesn't sound so different from English settlers from back then.
lol, English settlers created their own societies. Kikes create as much niggers do

>>19718385
The classic impotent rage of a dying culture. That is the sign of a sore loser. Like when a football player starts fighting with members of the other team because his team is being destroyed.

>>19718334
>English settlers did not migrate into an existing society and then start stealthily subverting it from within.
True, they weren't as cunning and kind as the Jews were with the now-dying Europeans and yet they did dissolve native cultures by means of pillage and genocide.
>the one thing that Europeans are vulnerable to
You can't expect to survive in the modern world if you are weak against intelligent and cunning methods.

>>19718409
What are you going to do once you've subverted and destroyed everything and Israel no longer gets money, weapons and military support from the West? Can you even rationally explain why it's necessary for you to subvert and destroy everything and what you're supposed to get out of it?

>>19718424
This is weak whataboutism meant to distract from the topic at hand, which is the fact that jews infiltrate and destroy nations from within.

>You can't expect to survive in the modern world if you are weak against intelligent and cunning methods.
Have fun fending off the islamic world with your intelligent and cunning methods once you lose all Western support.

>>19718409
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJo7LhSPJaY

>>19718426
I don't know, I'm not Jewish. I simply recognize their cultural and political success over a weaker culture.

>>19718439
You are jewish. So can you answer my questions or not?

>>19718433
>This is weak whataboutism meant to distract from the topic at hand, which is the fact that jews infiltrate and destroy nations from within.
I don't see how this is whataboutism. Barbarians use pillage and genocide to gain power, but Jews are more elegant and use their cunning and intelligence instead. There's no difference when it comes to results.
>Have fun fending off the islamic world with your intelligent and cunning methods once you lose all Western support.
Why do you assume I care about Israel?

>>19718479
i think this is actually the most retarded pilpul i've seen, and i've seen some shitty pilpul

it's like you got out of check by just putting the chess pieces in your mouth and eating them

>>19718443
I'm truly not Jewish, so I don't really have the view on Israel or Western subversion that you think I have. My guess would be that they will keep Europeans by the balls for decades, not truly dead nor alive, and once they are replaced, Jews will still be on top. They win either way.

>>19718491
You only treat English pillagers and Jews differently because you have a personal disdain for Jews, that is, you are biased. From the outside, they are extremely similar, if not the same.

>>19718498
WASPs and Jews have been cross-fertilizing for two centuries. The Anglo-Jew elite is not representative of some random schmuck in Yorkshire. It's just as evil as "pure" Jews. Which don't even exist, Ashkenazi (Eastern European Jews) aren't even real Jews.

>The enemy is Das Leihkapital. Your Enemy is Das Leihkapital, international, wandering Loan Capital. Your enemy is not Germany, your enemy is money on loan. And it would be better for you to be infected with typhus, and dysentery, and Bright's disease, than to be infected with this blindness which prevents you from understanding HOW you are undermined, how you are ruined.

>The big Jew is so bound up with this Leihkapital that no one is able to unscramble that omelet. It would be better for you to retire to Darbyshire and defy New Jerusalem, better for you to retire to Gloucester and find one spot that is England than to go on fighting for Jewry and ignoring the process.

>You let in the Jew and the Jew rotted your empire, and you yourselves out-jewed the Jew. Your allies in your victimized holdings are the bunyah, you stand for NOTHING but usury. And above metal usury; you have built up bank usury, 60% against 30 and 40%, and by that you WILL NOT be saved. Corrupting the whole earth, you have lost yourselves to yourselves.
Ezra Pound

>In brief, the great migration from the countryside to the towns began. The age of mechanized man was approaching. The new plutocracy and those of the old Whigs who were naturally perverse began their final and terrible offensive against the old country gentlemen. It was all the more terrible because the old “county families” were not just uprooted and annihilated. They were subjected to numerous mercantile blood transfusions until they had to undergo the final humiliation of accepting Jewish sons-in-law to save the ground to which they pathetically clung.
William Joyce

>>19718479
As expected, a jew doesn't want to discuss this.

>Why do you assume I care about Israel?
Because you're a jew.

>>19718493
If jews are so powerful and winning so hard, why are you afraid to admit you're a jew?

>They win either way.
Pyrrhic victory.

>>19718547
>As expected, a jew doesn't want to discuss this.
What's there to discuss? Each culture uses their own methods of conquering. Whatever the methods are, the results are what matter and what leave the losing side weak, defeated, and sometimes genocided.
>>19718547
>If jews are so powerful and winning so hard, why are you afraid to admit you're a jew?
Is it really outlandish to you the idea that a person can acknowledge the victory of a culture over another culture without belonging to the victor's side? I don't have to be Jewish to recognize their success.

>>19718577
You're a jew and anyone here can see that. You act cocky, but you're too afraid to even admit you are one.

s

>>19718592
>Y-you must be le Jew!
come on

The real redpill is that both those anons arguing are Jews, ala the no press is bad press model

>>19717090
love this thread about literature

>>19717090
>america
>we
Instantly dropt bitch you don't speak for the whole country

>>19717090
I ike Ellroy. This is a fun book about Kennedy and the agencies. It's a trilogy. Black Dahlia and L.A. Confidential are great too.

America was cursed from the getgo let's be real

>>19717090
It this the one where he theorizes the mafia powerbottomed Marilyn Monroe to oblivion with an overdose of cocaine suppositories, or was that a different writer?

>>19717090
Is this the one where he theorizes the mafia powerbottomed Marilyn Monroe to oblivion with an overdose of cocaine suppositories, or was that a different writer?

>>19717114
>What happened to talking about how big the desert is or how nice the forest is
slit your throat chud.

>>19717090
Kino

>>19721567
Hate to further derail the thread but that was a different mafia:
https://counter-currents.com/2011/08/who-killed-marilyn-monroe/

>In olden times,” Upton Sinclair once remarked, “Jewish traders sold Christian girls into concubinage and into prostitution, and even today they display the same activity in the same field in southern California where I live.” Or as F. Scott Fitzgerald summed up the Hollywood scene of his era — “a Jewish holiday, a Gentile tragedy” (Gabler, 2).

>Monroe’s physician Hyman Engelberg and her therapist Ralph Greenson were the first to her death scene, reported to be the result of a drug overdose, but they did not call police for four hours. One investigative author, Donald Spoto, in a 1993 work, even burdens Greenson with the responsibility for killing her, directing that a female employee “administer [to Monroe] … a fatal barbiturate-laced enema.” (In this scenario, Greenson’s motivation was that Monroe was trying to free herself from his influence and control, and had fired him [Wolfe, 99]).

>Once Marilyn Monroe became Greenson’s patient, he became one of the most important Comintern operatives in America; he had access to the mind of a woman who often shared the bed with the president of the United States and was an intimate of the attorney general [Kennedy’s brother, Robert] . . . As Greenson has correctly stated, Marilyn Monroe had a tendency to ‘get involved with very destructive people, who will engage in some sort of sado-masochistic relationship with her.’ Ironically, among these people was her psychiatrist [Greenson], her physician [Engelberg], and her housekeeper, Eunice Murray [who was appointed by Greenson to live with Ms. Monroe and report back to him], who joined in a conspiracy to survey Marilyn Monroe within a sphere of influence designed to gather intelligence from her relationship with the president of the United States and the attorney general (Wolfe, 386).

>>19717090
what's this? a "pulp" writer outdoing the trans BIPOC MFA crowd? huh...imagine that

>>19717266
Third person replying to you now, the first person is correct and you are incorrect.

>>19722933
Prove it.

>>19719379
Well one of them is probably an Anglo, and the other is an Internationalist Israelite, so you are most likely correct.
This thread and how ugly it is makes me dislike both groups a little bit more.

>>19722941
....

>>19722980
No, prove I'm incorrect.

>>19722966
Anglos are just Jews born in English speaking country.

>>19717299
He’s right though. This BS was already a cliche in 90’s.

> Every significant person ever was akshully some evil, cruel racist.
> No powerful person ever his peopel’s or his countries interest at hear.

>>19724065
The truth is never a cliché.

>>19717114
>NOOOOO, DONT MAKE FUN OF MEEEEEEE

>>19717114
Fpbp

>>19717114
Americans are culturally insecure, they either try too hard to establish a "new American style" to compete with Europe or they give up and start relentlessly shitting on themselves for supposedly not being as cultured as the old world. This has been going on since the revolution.

>>19722879
Very interesting actuality.

>>19717326
Yeah mad

>>19726562
t. blackie