The modern version of "high + low versus the middle" is Jews (and Asians) + brown people (and social rejects) versus Whites.

I noticed that lots of people on the semi-mainstream Right-Wing frame this as a class rather than ethnic conflict, which is pretty goofy since even Leftists have been telling everyone that it is an ethnic conflict for at least the last century. See Marxist-Leninist "anti-imperialism" ideology, for example (TL;DR: "Brown nationalism is good because it overthrows White colonies. White nationalism is evil because White people have colonies").

The modern "high + low vs middle" is only a conflict of class insofar as the White upper classes are being financially incentivized to betray their own ethnic groups and advance the biological interests of foreigners (territory and resource acquisition, i.e. colonizing White countries).

I predict that academics will soon claim that the Proto-Indo-Europeans originated in Iran.

They will likely claim that PIE had high levels of "Iranian ancestry" and justify this by conflating Iranian Neolithic with Caucasus Hunter-Gatherer ancestry, claiming that the two populations are indistinguishable, even though CHG and Iran_N populations are estimated to have diverged around 20,000 BC and can easily be distinguished.

The mixing between EHG and CHG that formed the PIE population took place ~15,000 years after the Iran_N and CHG split.

This image (HD: https://i.imgur.com/nSqSdqd.png) shows the amount of Iran_N ancestry in Proto-Indo-European populations.

Edit: Yes, Iran_N and CHG were quite similar, but not interchangeable.

follow JackChambersGB on Twitter btw, great architecture photographs from around the Anglosphere

New Word Order "food" pyramid.

Brief, simplified history of Marxist ideology from Marx to present:

In 1848, the Communist Manifesto laid out a handful of primary objectives, including:
- Abolition of property
- Destruction of family
- Destruction of nations
- Destruction of traditional culture
- Founding of a monopolistic, centralized banking system
- Centralization of all production, communication, and transport in the hands of "the state" (the ruling elite)

These objectives are shared by 99.99% of modern Leftists and they haven't diverged from these goals in almost 2 centuries.

(Btw the Communist Manifesto is like 20 pages long, I recommend reading it).

Marxism before 1923 aimed to achieve these objectives via a "colorblind" proletarian revolution against the "capitalist overlords" that they called the World Revolution. This strategy had failed miserably because the workers overwhelmingly sided with various nationalist movements (mostly Fascism) because they didn't like the idea of abolishing their families, property, nations, and traditions.

This led to two developmental pathways in Marxism, in the East and the West, both of which converge at the same endpoint.

In the East, Marxism from Lenin onwards shifted focus to the global struggle of the "oppressed races" against the "capitalist imperialists" (White people), while still paying lip service to "proletarian revolution." You'll see Marxists describing some ethnic groups as "proletarian nations of the world" and so on, which is just their obfuscatory way of saying "brown people."

Stalin implemented "socialism in one country", which was not nationalism — the USSR was a multi-racial empire — but the idea that the USSR must serve as a stable base of operations from which Communism could be spread throughout the world. Stalin had Leninist ideals.

Mao developed Marxist "anti-imperialist" ideology further with his Third Worldism, and both the USSR and PRC funded brown Communist insurgencies against White colonial states, e.g. Rhodesia and South Africa.

When people claim that "Marxists were based/trad/patriotic in the past," this is basically only true for the Third World Marxists, who were already serving the globalist agenda simply by revolting against White global hegemony.

Plus, they weren't really based at all. They still preached feminism, sometimes sexual depravity, and so on. But, most importantly, they only preached nationalism from the perspective of:
"brown nationalism = oppressed = good"
"white nationalism = oppressors = evil"

Meanwhile, Marxism in the West developed various strategies of cultural subversion (see: Frankfurt School, New School) that aimed to destroy the nationalistic spirit and traditional cultures of the Western proletariat. This was designed to soften up the masses for full globalist conquest and basically boiled down to:
"freaks = oppressed = good"
"normal people = oppressors = evil"

However, Western Marxists were also inspired by the "anti-imperialist" ideologies of Lenin & friends, which eventually led to the creation of things like Critical Race Theory and "intersectionality," which is the idea that all "oppressed" groups must unite against the "oppressors" (straight White men and, increasingly, White women).

Although much of the Left today does not vocally identify as Marxist, they still advance the primary objectives laid out in the Communist Manifesto.

Furthermore, the Left ideologically dominates the West to such a degree that many Leftists don't identify with any specific ideology at all. They simply declare that their insane political beliefs are "being a good person." Some of the most stringent Leftists around today have never read a single word of Marx, or Lenin, or Mao, or Gramsci, Lukacs, Marcuse, Adorno, but espouse their ideologies almost verbatim.

I've made all of these points before but I can't emphasize this enough. It's vital information for understanding our enemies.

WW2 = regime change throughout the West

New vax death euphemism: "sudden adult death syndrome"

Fu (2021)

'In Western Europe, the European-origin population share declines from 90% today to 45% by 2100 assuming present migration rates, but with no further migration this share will be 74%. In North America, the European share drops from 62% to 34%'

Jordan Peterson is back to his old tricks here, he's cleverly misleading the anti-vaccine movement in the same way he misled young white men on 'identity politics'.

He comes across as sympathetic and understanding, he says things you want to hear. He's an authority figure you want on your team. But pay to attention to the actual content here. Peterson is arguing that the current madness around vaccines and lockdowns is being driven by scared people warping opinion polls that the politicians take notice of.

This is bollocks!

Every single aspect of the agenda is top down, he needs to look no further than his own Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, who is a former apprentice of the WEF's young leaders scheme along with Adern in New Zealand.

The reason so many people are terrified is because of the media, and government propaganda, once again, top-down and at the behest of an international cabal.

In fact Peterson seems to want you to look everywhere except at his old friends in the NGO's and UN.