https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=11328

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4084356&forum_id=2#36865937)

You see, all of this does not come from nowhere. It comes from jewish prioritisation of threats. Thus those who are potential threats to jews (men, straight, white, etc.) must be shown as inherently bad and thus must be brought down, while those who are not a threat to jews must be promoted.

All of this is well thought out, and generally (with small exceptions) coincides with voting patterns. For example someone who is male, white, straight or married is more likely to vote for the Right, thus they are a bigger threat. Someone who is non-white, divorced, LGBT, or disabled will be more likely to vote left, thus they are a lesser threat.

Not surprisingly, jews, who have enormous power in the US, are shown here as “marginalised” and “oppressed”.

What you see here is how jews transform their ultimately selfish ethnic interests into ideology (identity politics left), with most people not realising that the modern “left” is nothing but a vehicle for jews to wage ethnic warfare against another ethnic group, while using various other groups as pawns.

The Left is simply a construct that exists to serve and further jewish ethnic interests in western environment, while hiding its real purpose behind idealism and lofty ideas.

One could even speculate that the left is not “real”, but just a masque for jewish interests, and would not exist if there were no jews.

The purpose behind it (in modern times) is to construct a coalition of minorities, or coalition of the “oppressed” in order to bring down the dominant ethnic group in their host society.

In the past, Left was about the workers vs the capitalists. The aim was to overthrow the gentile elites. After that jewish experiment ultimately failed in the Soviet Union, now it is about identity politics – coalitions of minorities vs the majority.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4084356&forum_id=2#36866667)

https://quillette.com/2018/09/21/the-preachers-of-the-great-awokening/

Wokeness:

". . . a status system that functions predominantly to distinguish white elites from the white masses (whom we will call hoi polloi). It does this by offering a rich signalling vocabulary for traits and possessions such as education, intelligence, openness, leisure, wealth, and cosmopolitanism, all of which educated elites value (for a similar analysis, see Rehain Selam’s August essay in the Atlantic, discussed by David French in the National Review article linked above). From this perspective, the preachers of the Great Awokening—those who most ardently and eloquently articulate the principles of Wokeness—obtain status because they (a) signal the possession of desired traits and (b) promulgate a powerful narrative that legitimizes the status disparity between white elites and hoi polloi. The elites, according to these preachers, are morally righteous and therefore deserve status, whereas hoi polloi are morally backward and deserve obloquy and derision."

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4084356&forum_id=2#36866686)