Time to play the game
When you're a prisoner in the pig system, you have a dilemma.
If you are reading this, you are familiar with the moral arguments for and against Zionism. I find such arguments have little ability to change peoples’ minds because we are not “blank slates” and each man has his own priors going into the debate. This rant (?), which admittedly is the first serious political thing I have written longer than a “poast”, argues against Zionism from an economic perspective.
Economics is derided as a silly subject (it is called the dismal science by many), and in no sterner terms than on the, and as a part of this scene I say this affectionately, “schizo” right, due to the lie of the free market. Many refrains such as “all economies are planned economies” (true) are common among intelligent but tragically dispossessed Whites for whom no role in the pig system has been planned at all. Hilariously, Dullsville NRXs who talk about “muh Calvinists” (no) have a rather Calvinist worldview, at least in their determinism and their ascribing of unassailable economic power to those in charge. But economics can have merit in describing human behaviour and relationships.
The Prisoner’s Dilemma is a thought experiment in economics where two parties are imprisoned, and if one confesses, he leaves scot free (while the other gets a longer sentence), and if they both confess, they both get a reduced sentence. No matter what you do, you “win” by “confessing” (ie. doing what is in your interest). If your opponent does what is in his interest or if he doesn’t, you still get more benefit by doing do what is in your interest than by not doing it.
This applies to our political situation, understood correctly as a struggle between White nations and globalism, of which Zionism is an unwavering commitment.
Disregarding lost-cause dispensationalist Christians in America, Whites have at best a neutral opinion on jews and Zionism. Nothing is lost if we win, whether jews lose or they also win. Winning in this case means taking our own side, and I do not need to tell the reader how clearly that means not supporting a system predicated on hurting White nations.
The rebuttal: the best scenario for all is to both stay silent because only a small amount of bad outcomes in total were doled out. “The total happiness in the world increased” (insert that ridiculous libtard meme about someone robbing you). Even putting aside that Zionism is of necessity an asymmetrical relationship where “co-operation” means White nations doing the grunt work, this does not change the principle that no matter what jews do, Whites must act in their own interest, which involves ending the asymmetrical relationship.
It’s time to play the game.