Coca-Cola Uses Cane-Sugar for the Jews, But Not For Society at Large
Public Welfare, Public Health, and Even Consumer Preference Are of No Concern, But Pandering to Jewish Interests Is
Readers of this publication, and those who have made my personal acquaintance or friendship know I am no fan of Coca-Cola, as I regularly make references to a certain line in “Death of the West” by Death in June. Those familiar with my writings and me personally know I loathe fast-food in particular. Were it possible, most of it should be banned. Indeed, fast-food giants like McDonalds, Kentucky Fried Chicken, and the like must be banned in Germany, Europe and the United Kingdom as most portents of American Unkultur that have been infused into European society and civilization: banned in the interests of public health and restoring cultural hygiene against amerikanische Seelenlosigkeit.1 Concerning Coca-Cola specifically, the stuff just tastes awful—although original formulas using real cane sugar in Europe, Mexico, and the like tastes somewhat better. Coca-Cola has of course been made with high fructose corn syrup since the mid 1980s, after the New Coke fiasco, in fact.
With these preambles and disclaimers in mind, readers should be made aware that Coca-Cola, while never making such dispensations for the greater good of society or the public welfare, has produced a special edition of two liter plastic bottles made not with high fructose corn syrup, but sucrose, i.e. cane sugar The gigantic soda and beverage concern is selling this special edition—marked by a yellow cap—to cater to the sort of extraordinary—and extraordinarily ridiculous—dietary restrictions demanded by Judaic kosher laws. Specifically, kosher law prohibits the consumption of corn eight days before Passover. Rather than abstain from the stuff for eight days—any sensible person should permanently abstain from Coca-Cola and other sugary soft drinks, as this author has largely abstained from Coca-Cola since adolescence—Jewish interests have obliged Coca-Cola to produce and sell what should be available to the general public at all times. And, of course, Coca-Cola has accommodated them.
This reveals much about our society, and the sorts of powerful interests with seemingly inexhaustible corporate money and influence that shape that society. As stated, neither Coca-Cola nor other food and beverage concerns will voluntarily switch from high fructose corn syrup in an interest for public health and to promote the public good2—not if it means they make a little less money. But they will shamelessly pander to a certain insular blood cult in our midst, because it is Jews and Jewish interests that count. As argued in “Exorcising the False God of Religious Tolerance,” no special dispensation should ever be made for bizarre, idiotic, harmful, or even alien religious beliefs and practices. Consuming corn—or more particularly high fructose corn syrup—through the year except this eight-day period is such a bizarre, moronic practice, and it is even more bizarre that this and other food and beverage concerns should modify a product for such a small period of time, for less than two percent of the population. Because Coca-Cola is hardly a staple food item (like milk, eggs or chicken, or beef, for example), the pandering seems particularly absurd. If consumption of high fructose corn syrup is acceptable for society at large—point of fact, it is not—so it should be acceptable for any religious minority in our midst, for better or, in actuality, for worse. Those that do not wish to partake are not forced to do so.
This story has become somewhat viral. Consumers who enjoy Coca-Cola but are correctly reviled by high fructose corn syrup have learned of this, are spreading the word, stocking up the soft drink made with real cane sugar, instead of buying Coca-Cola bottled in Mexico at exorbitant prices. In fairness, it should be cautioned that mainstream conservative sorts who fetishize unbridled, corporate capitalism and the “free market” could potentially be proven right in this one particular instance. Perhaps this story will convince Coca-Cola and other food and beverage concerns to make the switch voluntarily. Readers however should not hold their breath, as this seems most unlikely.
In the absence of such an unlikely turn of events, this story proves again several central contentions asserted time and again by this author. Among them, for whatever good capitalism does, it only does so if it is constrained and channeled by certain externalities in the interest of the public good and the welfare of society (welfare in its original sense, as properly understood). This includes effective, common-sense regulations and market restrictions, such as the European Union’s sensible and necessary restrictions on the high-fructose corn syrup monster, which are tantamount to a ban with very few limited exceptions. Another important constraint is the social cohesion and community that naturally flourishes in a homogeneous society, bound together by common blood, ancestry, language, and centuries old culture, which in turn leads commercial enterprise derived from these nations to act more often in the national interest. Finally, as argued recently, religious freedom and tolerance need to be jettisoned. This pertains to the legal proscription against state power restricting the exercise of certain religions, as well as absurd, harmful, or undesirable religious beliefs and practices. But just as importantly, it pertains to “religious freedom” as a societal norm and value.
It is an absolute scandal and disgrace that a giant food and beverage concern like Coca-Cola with transcendent levels of power, wealth, and influence—and indeed a prominent avatar of American Unkultur itself—would flagrantly ignore the public welfare and greater good by failing to voluntarily switching from high fructose corn syrup to cane sugar, but gladly panders and prostrates to Jewish interests. Coca-Cola panders and prostrates itself in the service of an absurd religious practice that should be mocked and ridiculed. It is nothing less than the latest shame and disgrace of American society and what is very loosely described as American society and culture. The more enlightened fail to see any society or culture, at all.
PLEASE NOTE: Readers who appreciate the insight and perspective set forth in writing like this are urged to consider offering a paid subscription or even a founding member subscription, provided such expenditures are not unduly burdensome. Readers who enjoyed this article and found it informative and insightful are also encouraged to signify their favor for this and other writings by clicking on the “like emoji,” as well as sharing this and other articles to those who would find this and other essays and articles interesting, insightful, or provocative. The like emoji or lack thereof is a greater factor than it should be that readers unfamiliar with an author or publication use to decide whether to read any particular piece or not.
Follow Richard Parker on twitter (or X if one prefers) (@)astheravencalls.com. Remove the parentheses, which were inserted to avoid conflict with Substack’s own handle system.
IMPORTANT: obnoxious Jews and Hitler idolators on another essay have compelled the promulgation of an official COMMENT POLICY.
Readers are directed to the final segment of “Culture as Programming: A Case Study of Frau Löwenherz, aka Leonie Plaar,” articulating at length that ending American occupation and expunging many portents of American popular Unkultur are essential for civilization and national rejuvenation and survival. That segment reads, in pertinent part:
At some point, Germans and Europeans writ large need to understand that the United States is not their friend and find some way to expel not only the American armed forces from Germany and other European countries, but expel and expunge many horrid auspices of American Unkultur from their midst. This will require a more enlightened, authoritarian ethos, a dark enlightenment, that rejects American platitudes about individual autonomy and especially the absurd notion that what consenting adults do is no one else’s concern. If for example Germany were to ban or oust McDonald’s as ought and must be done, a critical mass of persons must come to understand that persons making the “choice” to patron these portents of Pax Americana affect Germans and Europeans collectively.
The controversy surrounding high fructose corn syrup is somewhat beyond the purview of this short essay. One reason why high fructose corn syrup is quite likely to be much more deleterious to public health lies in its chemical structure. Sucrose has an equal ratio of fructose to glucose. High fructose corn syrup however does not have an equal ratio, and can be 55-45 and even 65-35 fructose to glucose. This likely causes a variety of health problems, including insulin regulation (high fructose corn syrup is likely to have a greater propensity to cause diabetes). This imbalance may also dysregulate the body, sending signals that is has consumed glucose when it has not, which intensify cravings. There is also evidence indicating the imbalanced chemical structure is likely much harder on the liver than ordinary sucrose.
It is a matter of controversy, but readers should be aware that many studies are industry funded, including those asserting that high fructose corn syrup is no different than sugar.
The jews get paid to be able to say something is kosher. They'd demand toe-jam be kosher if they could. Everything about 'judaism' is either a scam or promotes genocide.
U