I think you're wrong on the point of whether ethnic identity is necessarily the wrong approach. Marxism is a powerful toxin* precisely because it destroys identity. This is also why the Kalegi plan prioritized breaking down shared identity. The idea was to destroy public cohesion so master class with a strong in-group preference could rule them!
In-group preference long predates marxism. It's the wellspring of the nation-state, and for good reasons. National identity is a source of strength.
Does Jewish nepotism in hollywood imply their role in the film industry would be stronger if they stopped preferring other jews? Is it a bad thing? I would argue this is a good thing on their part. By the same token, are the Swedes are better off because their regimes chose not to prefer their own people over migrants? I have a very hard time seeing how that would be the case.
Short answer : yes it is
I think you're wrong on the point of whether ethnic identity is necessarily the wrong approach. Marxism is a powerful toxin* precisely because it destroys identity. This is also why the Kalegi plan prioritized breaking down shared identity. The idea was to destroy public cohesion so master class with a strong in-group preference could rule them!
In-group preference long predates marxism. It's the wellspring of the nation-state, and for good reasons. National identity is a source of strength.
Does Jewish nepotism in hollywood imply their role in the film industry would be stronger if they stopped preferring other jews? Is it a bad thing? I would argue this is a good thing on their part. By the same token, are the Swedes are better off because their regimes chose not to prefer their own people over migrants? I have a very hard time seeing how that would be the case.
*edit: I should add that Chris Langan elaborates on the point of how loss of coherence is a primary aspect of cultural subversion: https://chrislangan.substack.com/p/mass-migration-kills