Note: this passage is taken from a longer work I am in the process of composing, on the meta-significance of #Pizzagate. See earlier-published excerpts of this work here and here. For the distressing backstory regarding the little girl in the picture below, see here.

Appropriate T-shirt for a little girl?

In some circles, much is made of the use of the term “goyim,” “gentile,” and “shiksa,” by certain devout or tribalist-minded Jews. Use of these terms displays the classic ingroup/outgroup mentality par excellence, as they are words which cannot be uttered except with contempt. Of course, ethnocentrism obtains in nearly every culture, including the most “tolerant” ones. Where multiculturalism is the enforced norm, as is increasingly the case in the Western world, the derided outsider is he who wishes to remain among his own kind… if his own kind is some subspecies of white, that is.

I don’t wish to delve into this topic, which is already much discussed in Alt-Right circles, and increasingly in the mainstream, nor do I intend to dwell at length upon the so-called “Jewish question” with regard to terms like “goyim”; instead, I merely seek to consider the usage of such terms by Jews whose ethnic identity is paramount to their self-perception. In any event, “goyim” is certainly a deeply dehumanizing term, which evidently connotes something close to cattle; its usage—absent an ironic, satirical, or comedic context—demonstrates that the user views those not of his kind as contemptible, fit only for exploitation and slaughter.

We should similarly regard the so-called “pedo-code” which has seemingly shown up in various places, most notably the aforementioned emails uncovered by Wikileaks, wherein, according to a compelling interpretation with some precedent, children are referred to as various kinds of food, most prominently “pizza” (hence #pizzagate), but also, inter alia, “pasta,” “hot dogs,” and “ice cream.” How do such terms reflect upon the mindset of those who use them?

Here, the metaphorical connotation is slightly different from the “goyim/cattle” slur, because the emphasis is less upon utility (cattle are by definition useful), and more upon a queasy species of delectation.

These are, after all, direct references to foods not typically enjoyed for their nutritional qualities, but because they taste good. Indeed, most of these items are foods liked by children for this very reason: they are fun to eat. It is surely significant that this coded terminology doesn’t include foods like broccoli, carrots, lettuce, or spinach, or even sweet-tasting but healthy items like grapes, oranges, peaches or apples Instead, the foods chosen to represent children are generally thought to be “sinfully” delicious, the “sin” consisting in their absence of healthy or nutritional value. With this in mind, it is undoubtedly also of interest that an established record exists of child-creepers referring to the objects of their lust as “candy.”

What can all of this mean, besides the disturbingly obvious, that they find children a toothsome and delectable treat?

To put it baldly, we find such terminology reflective of a habit of rabid consumption. To a degree, this attitude is of a piece with how human lust is often imaginatively conceived, particularly from a narrative perspective: sexual desire leads one to be overcome with an aggressive hunger to devour the object of one’s desire. Viewed in the context of child-lust—loathsome as such a consideration is, it must nevertheless be confronted—this perspective makes a certain terrible sense: being small, children might be viewed as “tidbits” or “snacks” to be indulged in for refreshment and enjoyment.

But there appears to be more to the matter, even if little is known for sure concerning this “more.” It is asserted in some circles that those who feel compelled to indulge themselves thusly actually wind up gaining something from the experience: indeed, an absorption of youthful energy is said to take place,” in somewhat the same manner as oil, coal and other precious substances are mined from the earth, whereby the victimizer obtains newfound vitality from the youth he has “consumed.”

An infamous picture from Alefantis's Instagram page. Note the girl's similarity to the "Pizza Slut," above
Many slightly varying hypotheses have been made concerning the exact mechanism which is said to assist in this process of absorption. To anyone with a morally sensitive or tender-hearted nature, this notion is again difficult to contemplate; once more, we must put aside our healthy squeamishness for the sake of plumbing the full depth of possibilities surrounding the undertaking of these behaviors. 

Do the pedo-elites in question have a thirst for cruelty merely because inflicting pain on the helpless is pleasing to them? Is the engagement in these atrocities a means of initiation of sorts, whereby those new to the clique are brought into the fullness of its forbidden pleasures and delectable terrors? Or are these acts an occasion by which some on the more powerful end of the “lowerarchy” are able to perform blackmail upon one another, as discussed previously?

Surely the answer is, “all of the above.” But it is necessary for our investigation to hone in on the most distressing aspect listed above: the wanton and rapacious cruelty. For among these sorts of people there does indeed seem to be a propensity to make others suffer—specifically, to cause the suffering of those whom they view as a “lower” species, which is to say, everyone not of their “kind.” It is difficult for those with a normal temperament to grasp this baleful truth. It can be exhausting indeed to try to comprehend it.

One “gets” the utility of cruelty under certain circumstances, of course; it is easy enough to understand how cruelty can even be “fun” on some occasions, if one is setting out to slight or hurt the feelings of someone whom one strongly dislikes, for reasons that he—rightly or wrongly—justifies to himself. But it is difficult to fathom cruelty committed for cruelty’s sake, against those for whom one feels not dislike but disdain, as they are judged to be of a less exalted order than oneself, and are viewed as worthy only of being subjected to the worst sort of exploitation.

Likewise, displaying oneself as the sort of creature who would commit such acts against the weak and powerless—who is willing to go “beyond good and evil” in the most decisive manner imaginable (which means doing precisely what those with the “slave morality” would simply and correctly call evil)—serves as one’s initiation into the inner sanctum of the “pedocracy." Alternatively, indulgence in such atrocities renders one vulnerable to blackmail should a certain selected leader need to be steered in a particular direction, or should he show signs of becoming obstreperous or uncooperative for one reason or another. 

Thus, getting others to indulge in such a manner does have a certain practical utility, which can itself serve to empower the "middle-management" figures previously expounded upon. Yet we ought not ignore the less savory aspect of these activities, as signaled by the "delicious food" code names that these indulgences have been assigned. There is a genuine conviction of ghastily gleeful enjoyment expressed at the prospect of engaging in these "unspeakable rites."

Andy Nowicki, assistant editor of Alternative Right, is the author of eight books, including Lost Violent SoulsHeart Killer and The Columbine Pilgrim. Visit his Soundcloud page.


No comments:

Post a Comment