The problem with Jews is a kind of Lecterism. Why is Hannibal Lecter the way he is? He is so smart and feels superior that he doesn’t want to live by the rules of the sheeple folks. He wants to write his own rules. This is why he’s at war with normal morality. It hems him in and forces him to repress his superiority.

猶太人存在的問題屬于萊克特主義的一種。為什么漢尼拔·萊克特（即《沉默的羔羊》系列的食人魔男主）會成為那樣的人？他聰明絕頂，還覺得自己高人一等，所以他在生活方式上不想遵循羊群般庸眾定下的規(guī)則。他想自己來定規(guī)則，這就是為什么他會和正常的道德觀開戰(zhàn)。后者把他給框死了，還逼著他去壓制自己的優(yōu)越感。


Lecterism is present in David Mamet’s works where it’s all about the game and who can play to win. Those who invoke rules and principles are just mediocrities who can’t play to win, so they use the rule-of-law or ‘justice’ talk as a crutch. It’s like the not-too-bright mafia boss in the Coens’ MILLER’S CROSSING talks of ‘ethics’. Not because he’s particularly ethical or moral but because it offers goal-posts in a game where he often feels lost.

大衛(wèi)·馬梅特的作品中也存在萊克特主義，他的作品全都是關(guān)于游戲以及誰能玩贏這個(gè)游戲的。那些訴諸規(guī)則和原則的人只是庸材，他們是贏不了的，所以他們是把法治或標(biāo)榜“正義”的言辭當(dāng)成拐杖來用的。就像科恩兄弟的《米勒的十字路口》中那個(gè)不太聰明的黑手黨談?wù)摗皞惱淼赖隆币粯?。并不是因?yàn)樗貏e重視倫理或特別講道德，而是因?yàn)閭惱淼赖略诮?jīng)常會讓他感到失落的游戲中起到了足球門柱的作用。
（譯注：大衛(wèi)·馬梅特1947年出生于美國，被認(rèn)為是美國最偉大的劇作家之一；《米勒的十字路口》為1990年的高分黑幫電影））

Of course, Jews prefer moral and principled goyim to amoral and nihilistic goyim. Jews certainly preferred rule-bound Anglos with ‘liberal democracy’ to hyper-Nietzschean Nazi Teutons.
So, if Jews had to choose between moral goyim and amoral goyim, they prefer the former.

當(dāng)然了，猶太人偏愛的是有德也講原則的非猶太人（goyim），而不是無德且秉持虛無主義的非猶太人。猶太人偏愛的當(dāng)然是受規(guī)則約束還擁有“自由民主”的盎格魯人了，而不是深度尼采化的納粹主義日耳曼人。
所以，如果猶太人必須在講道德的非猶太人和不講道德的非猶太人之間作選擇，他們會更中意前者。

But the problem is… EVEN IF all goyim were decent and moral, it would pose a problem for Jews because a society dominated by goy morality and decency would apply pressure upon to Jews to act within accepted norms. But Jews don’t want to. Jews want to make up their own rules. They want more power and wealth than others. They don’t want to be equal with goyim but above goyim. So, even though Jews will push for ‘equality’ in a world where they are discriminated and repressed, Jews don’t want to settle for equality between Jews and goyim because that would hamstring Jewish Power.

但問題在于，就算所有的非猶太人都是有德的體面人, 也會給猶太人造成一個(gè)問題，因?yàn)橐粋€(gè)由非猶太人的道德和禮儀支配的社會，會向猶太人施壓，會迫使他們按照大眾認(rèn)可的行為規(guī)范去行事。但猶太人可不想照做。猶太人想自己來建構(gòu)規(guī)范。他們希望比其他人擁有更多的權(quán)力和財(cái)富。他們可不想和非猶太人平等，他們希望自己的地位能高過非猶太人。所以，就算猶太人愿意在一個(gè)受人歧視和壓制的世界中努力爭取“平等”，他們也不會滿足于自己和非猶太人間的這種平等，因?yàn)檫@種平等會阻滯猶太人權(quán)勢的增長。

When Jews are down and feel oppressed by bad goyim, they appeal to good goyim and the rule of law. But when good goyim prevail over bad goyim and offer Jews equality and protection of rule of law, the story doesn’t end there because Jews want more than rule of law. They want Rule of Jew.

當(dāng)猶太人處境糟糕，感覺到自己受到非猶太惡人的壓迫時(shí)，他們會找非猶太好人陳情，并呼吁法治。可是當(dāng)非猶太好人戰(zhàn)勝了非猶太惡人，并向猶太人提供了平等和法治保護(hù)，故事到這里也沒有結(jié)束，因?yàn)楠q太人想要的可不只是法治。他們要的是由猶太人來統(tǒng)治。

After all, in a fair, decent, and normal world, the US would be fair to both Jews and Palestinians, not support Zionism to the hilt against Palestinians. The US would call on both Iran and Israel to relinquish nuclear weapons technology. US would not let scumbags like Jonathan Pollard to walk free. US would not allow Arnon Milchan to operate as a free man for his crimes against the US. Jews would be called out on Hollywood’s hate campaign against Musli... who, for a time, were depicted only as terrorists.

畢竟，在一個(gè)公平、體面和正常的世界里，美國對猶太人和巴勒斯坦人都會很公平，而不會全力支持猶太復(fù)國主義對付巴勒斯坦人。美國會呼吁伊朗和以色列都放棄核武器技術(shù)。美國不會無罪釋放喬納森·波拉德這樣的卑鄙小人。鑒于其對美國犯下的罪行，美國也不會允許阿農(nóng)·米爾坎逍遙法外。猶太人會因?yàn)楹萌R塢對穆斯林的仇恨宣傳而備受指責(zé)，有段時(shí)間穆斯林只會被描繪成恐怖分子。
（譯注：喬納森·波拉德（1954-），美國政府前情報(bào)分析師。1987年，波拉德承認(rèn)從事間諜活動并向以色列提供機(jī)密情報(bào)，因違反《間諜法》被判處無期徒刑，是美國歷史上唯一一個(gè)因?yàn)橄蛎擞褌鬟f信息而被判處無期徒刑的美國人；阿農(nóng)·米爾坎（1944-），以色列億萬富翁，電影制片人，60至80年代曾擔(dān)任以色列情報(bào)員）

Jews needed goyim to be moral and decent than monstrous and ‘a(chǎn)ntisemitic’ in order for Jews to gain emancipation and progress. Jews needed goyim who rejected and fought against crazies like the Nazis and other monsters. But Jews were never content with mere guarantee of rule of law and shared principles. They were insistent on gaining top power and ruling as they wished.
But such behavior is amoral, anti-moral, and finally immoral and evil. And if Jewish Power grown evil insists on goy compliance, then goyim also become evil in their aiding and abetting of Jewish Evil.

為了猶太人的解放和進(jìn)步，猶太人需要非猶太人有德且體面，而不是荒誕無稽且“反猶”。猶太人需要非猶太人拒斥納粹之類的魔頭和狂人并與之斗爭。但猶太人從不滿足于僅僅確保法治和共同原則的存在。他們執(zhí)意要攫取最高權(quán)力，并按照自己的意愿進(jìn)行統(tǒng)治。但這樣的行為是僭越了道德的，是反道德的，最后變成了傷風(fēng)敗俗和邪惡。而如果蹈向了邪惡的猶太強(qiáng)權(quán)堅(jiān)持要非猶太人屈從，那么非猶太人也會在佐助猶太人行惡的過程中把自己也變得邪惡。

And so, it’s a kind of paradox. Jews appealed to goy morality against goy amorality of the Nazis. But goy morality that allowed Jews to gain power eventually surrendered to immorality because Jewish Power insisted on trampling on moral rules and ethical principles. Goy morality, in its generosity to Jews, ended up immoral. If goy morality(that offered decency and freedom to Jews) led to Jews using their freedom to bring about a new order in which they’re above the law, then morality paved the way to immorality.

所以，這是一種悖論。猶太人借助非猶太人的道德來對抗納粹的非猶太人道德.。但猶太人由以攫取到權(quán)力的非猶太人道德，最終會向不道德投降，因?yàn)楠q太強(qiáng)權(quán)鐵了心要踐踏道德準(zhǔn)則和倫理原則。非猶太人的道德，盡管寬宏大量地對待猶太人，最終卻淪為不道德。如果非猶太人的道德（為猶太人提供了體面和自由）導(dǎo)致猶太人利用自己的自由創(chuàng)造出了一種凌駕于法律的新秩序，那么道德就為不道德的滋生鋪平了道路。

Of course, Jews still pontificate about right vs wrong, about the evil Nazis and ‘racism’ and etc. But it’s all bogus morality because it boils down to ‘whites should revere and obey Jews no matter what because Jews are always wise and superior and know best’. Indeed, Jewish Morality lacks sincerity and is really just a mind-game of tricking goyim into serving Jewish Evil as some moral obligation.

當(dāng)然了，猶太人至今還在目空一切地談?wù)搶εc錯(cuò)，談?wù)撔皭旱募{粹和“種族主義”等等。但這些全都是偽道德，因?yàn)樽罱K還是會歸結(jié)為“無論如何白人都應(yīng)該尊敬并服從猶太人，因?yàn)楠q太人永遠(yuǎn)是聰明的，是高人一等的，是最懂世情的”。猶太人的道德實(shí)在是缺乏誠意，其實(shí)不過是一種心理游戲，即哄騙非猶太人為猶太邪行服務(wù)，并將其內(nèi)化為某種道義上的責(zé)任。

Consider the movie LOST IN AMERICA. Albert Brooks the smart Jew finds himself in Middle America. He mostly meets nice decent people there though some are jerks. But even if goy folks were all nice and there wasn’t a jerk in sight, Brooks’ character would still feel stifled because he wants more from life than mere normality and decency. He wants more and more and more and more.

可以把電影《迷失的美國人》（1985）拿來兩相參契。聰明的猶太人阿爾伯特·布魯克斯發(fā)現(xiàn)自己身處美國中部。他在那里遇到的大部分人都是很有禮貌的正派人，雖然有些人是混蛋。但就算這些非猶太人的鄉(xiāng)民們都心地良善，目力所及之內(nèi)沒有一個(gè)是混蛋，但布魯克斯飾演的那個(gè)角色（David Howard）還是會感覺到窒息，因?yàn)槌诉@些正常狀態(tài)和體面，他還想從生活中得到更多的東西。他總是想要更多東西，無有止境。

Or consider the ending of THE HEARTBREAK KID. Grodin’s character did something outrageous in dumping his Jewish wife and nabbing the shikse blonde goddess wife. The angry father finally relented. But does Grodin’s character look content at the end surrounded by normal and decent people? Not exactly. He wants even more.

也可以參看下《青澀戀情》（1972）的結(jié)局。格羅丁飾演的角色做了一件很不像話的事情，他甩掉了自己的猶太妻子，搶來了一個(gè)非猶太人的金發(fā)女神一樣的妻子。那位憤怒的父親最后還是大發(fā)慈悲了。但到最后，被正常的體面人包圍的格羅丁看上去心滿意足了嗎？并沒有。他還想要更多。


If you let a weasel into a den of rabbits and if the rabbits accept him as a honorary fellow rabbit, will the weasel be content to just go along? No, it will feel discomfited because it is by nature a unrelenting weasel and doesn’t want to be a rabbit among rabbits, no more than a coyote wants to be a lamb among sheep.

如果你把一只黃鼠狼放進(jìn)了兔子窩里，如果兔子們也接受了它，把它當(dāng)成名譽(yù)上的同類，黃鼠狼會滿足于就這樣隨波逐流嗎？不會的，它會感到狼狽不堪，因?yàn)樗鷣砭褪且恢焕淇岬狞S鼠狼，它也不想成為兔子堆里的一只兔子，而叢林狼也是一樣的，不會想做羊群中的一只小羊羔。

And this is why the goy attempt at being nice and decent toward Jews failed. Jews appreciated the niceness only to the extent that it offered them freedom and social mobility. But feeling superior than goyim, they didn’t want to rise to the level of goyim, be good neighbors, and call it a day. Rather, they felt hampered in by goy rules and sought to break free to do whatever they chose to gain more and more.

而這也是為什么非猶太人試圖向猶太人示好并體面對待之，最終會失敗。猶太人只會在別人為他們提供了自由和社會流動性時(shí)，才會感激這種友善的態(tài)度。但他們會覺得自己比非猶太人優(yōu)越，他們可不想上升到非猶太人的水平，做個(gè)好鄰居什么的，然后心滿意足地過完這一天。相反，他們覺得自己受制于非猶太人的規(guī)則，然后就會去尋求突破藩籬，這樣只要能從中攫取到越來越多的利益，他們就能為所欲為了。

And yet, another problem is that, even as Jews feel contempt for goy sheeple rules of normality, they rely on goyim being normal and decent in order for themselves to gain supreme power. It’s like Jews won’t get anywhere in a world full of Negroes. As Negroyim are wild and crazy, they can never be too moral or normal. They will just cook Jews in pots and devour them.

然而，另一個(gè)問題是，就算猶太人蔑視那些羊群一般的非猶太人定下的常態(tài)規(guī)則，他們也會依靠非猶太人的正常和體面，由此讓自己攫取最高權(quán)力。這就像是，猶太人在一個(gè)全是黑人的世界里是不會有任何建樹的。由于黑人是粗野而瘋狂的人，他們絕對做不到太講道德，也不會特別正常。他們會直接把猶太人扔進(jìn)鍋里煮，然后吞吃掉。

In contrast, white goyim can be normal, decent, and orderly. They can create and manage a civilization. It is in such a setting that Jews can operate and gain power and wealth. But they still want more and don’t to be hamstrung by goy rules.

相反，非猶太人的白人是可以做到正常、體面和井井有條的。他們有能力創(chuàng)造一個(gè)文明并治理之。正是在這樣一種環(huán)境中，猶太人才能正常運(yùn)轉(zhuǎn)，并攫取權(quán)力和財(cái)富。但他們還是想得到更多，還是不想被非猶太人的規(guī)則拖后腿。

It’s like a rancher wants his animals to be domesticated than wild. Easier to handle domesticated animals than wild ones. Still, it is ultimately to control and slaughter them than to respect them as fellow creatures.

這就像是一個(gè)農(nóng)場主，希望自己的動物是馴服的而不是野生的。相比野生動物，馴服的動物更容易管理。不過，最終還是要控制乃至宰殺它們的，是不會像尊重自己同類一樣尊重它們的。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://flyercoupe.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處


I wonder if Lecter series were meant to be an alllegory of how Jewish amoralists see goy sheeple.
There’s a scene in THE WILD BUNCH where Pike Bishop says of Deke Thorton, “He gave his word”, and Dutch shouts back, “That’s no what counts. It’s whom you give it to.”

我很想知道，《沉默的羔羊》系列是否是刻意表現(xiàn)不講道德的猶太人對羊群般非猶太人的看法的一則寓言。
在《日落黃沙》（1969）中有一幕，派克·畢曉普談到了他對迪克·索頓的看法，“他已經(jīng)作出承諾了”，然后荷蘭人大喊著回答說，“這不頂用，重要的是你是在向誰作出承諾"。

Decency and morality are nice, but it seems white goyim made a mistake in offering them to Jews who merely took advantage of them to gain supreme power that would not only allow them to be act amoral and immoral but pressure even decent goyim to just cuck along out of either fear or naivete or perhaps both.

講體面、守道德是很好，但似乎非猶太人的白人犯了一個(gè)錯(cuò)誤，就是他們把這些拿來款待猶太人了，可猶太人只是利用了這些來攫取最高權(quán)力，而這種最高權(quán)力不僅能讓他們在行為上僭越道德乃至不道德，還會讓那些體面的非猶太人感受到摧眉折腰的壓力，而這不是出于恐懼就是出于天真，或是兼而有之。