The greatest racehorse on earth can sire with the World Champion donkey.

The result will be a sterile mule.

The finest Cola drink mixed with the most expensive beer will produce something that tastes like a particularly putrid sewer.

A black man everybody agrees to be handsome and a beautiful white woman will produce an offspring that looks exactly like what it is, a random mixing of two races.

This “handsome couple” nonsense goes all the way back to Alice in Wonderland, and was old in 1865. At the Tea Party the Hatter complains that his watch is ruined because the March Hare put butter in it.

The Hare meekly replies, “But it was the BEST butter.”

Likewise the “handsome couple” repeats the same old myth. If each of the couple looks good, it is the BEST butter.

I hear that when Hannity interviewed Dr. Duke, he asked, “Are you against interracial marriage?” When Dr. Duke said, “Yes,” Hannity looked shocked and said, “You really ARE a Nazi!”

Hannity considers everyone who is pro-white to be anaziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews. But he is “right wing,” so he is regarded differently by our natural inclinations.

WRONG.

Read the Mantra. This is one reason it has to be so long. Anyone who, ACTIVELY OR PASSIVELY, subscribes to immigration and especially assimilation is joining the battle to destroy our race, and it makes no difference whether their motivation comes from the Pope, Karl Marx, or Ayn Rand.

With all these years of experience, I have discovered that only the Mantra leaves in every point that, in actual debate, we are likely to sag on. The Mantra has to be long because it hits each point the other side is likely to bring up, and it WARNS US not to sag on ANY point.

And, believe you me, the best are likely to sag on a regular basis.

We have seen Stormfront in a huge debate about whether a person must be Christian to be pro-white. Actually, the early Christian belief that the world would end soon got mixed in with degenerate Zoroastrianism and ended up making an oxymoron in our society of the words “genetic morality.”

I seem to be the only one here YET who has ever used that phrase. But heredity is more than half of life, and a set of Traditional Values that only addresses environment can be fatal and is mortally sinful.

Yet only I ever SAY that, even now.

We back down when someone talks about the blacks’ RIGHT to marry white women. But I see that you do not have any right to that which you will destroy. You are not allowed to handle museum pieces, though they are public property because you may damage them. But a black has a right to a blond wife and his seed will destroy the blondness.

It is not MORAL to let children handle precious and delicate things. But the kids MIGHT not damage them. But a black marrying a blond will DEFINITELY destroy what he says he has a right to.

Nobody else points that out.

It may be time for us to stop bitching about the Mantra and concentrate on getting our act together.

I was getting ready to write this article, and Lo! BUGS Commenters coming back from a sally in Stormfront were discussing their raid, and one was chastised for apologizing to an insulting anti-Mantra type. He admitted his error.

But what hit me, as I got ready to write this, was that his BUGS critic accused him of “the battered wife syndrome,” and he agreed with the term.

This EXPERIENCE, not incidentally, falls right in with what I want to say here.

Don’t be a battered wife or Stockholm Syndrome type. It makes not the slightest difference whether your opponent is a Marxist or a royalist. In the real world, they are anti-white. No one is more vociferously anti-white than the militia types who go on the border to stop immigration. They make militant declarations of “anti-racism” that make leftists look wimpish.

What in the HELL is the point of a BORDER between any country and a Multiculture? Protecting a multiculture from outsiders is insane.

Back to my basic point about the discussion after the raid on Stormfront. Having dealt my whole life with bitchers and people who constantly threaten to take their toys and go home, this immediate acceptance of somewhat insulting label by HD, “battered wife,” gave me enormous joy.

I constantly refer to a mistake Lord Nelson made, and he tiresomely apologizes for it. If you will READ what I say about it, I am full of praise for him. He had been arguing and had moved off of attacking ASSIMILATION, because he found that attacking immigration, whites being overwhelmed, and went on that way.

When you find your going easier, you have to ask yourself WHY it is going easier. Attacking immigration, especially illegal immigration, does anti-whites little harm. It’s nothing new and there are already plenty of rapidly multiplying nonwhites inside white borders to get rid of us by intermarriage.

The point was not that Lord Nelson had made the mistake. The only critical thing to me, as with HD, was how he took my criticism. Like HD after the Stormfront raid, he just took it and ran with it.

A lifetime of experience has shown me that almost every good movement goes down when it gets the ego bitchers and sore asses into places of authority. Errors are common. TAKING AND USING CRITICISM is very, very, very RARE.

A writer has the same problem at a party that a doctor does.

We all know the old saw about every time a doctor goes to a party he gets a line of people who come up and say, “I know it’s after hours, doc, but I have this pain in my lower back…”

A writer has the same problem. There is a line of people who come up to him and complain, “I can TALK out a subject just fine, but when I sit down to WRITE it it comes all unstuck.”

In my party days I would ask them, “Can you repair a TV set?” They would look at me like I was crazy — a lot of people have done that — and I deliver my explanation:

Writing is no more a natural talent than fixing a TV was.

This point is relevant because HD and some others have been complaining they have real trouble with understanding what I am saying. He has an “engineering” mind.

My father was a Ceramic engineer. He would say the stuff I was in was arguing about rules, but, he said, “I deal with GOD’S rules.”

I finally got the guts to tell him that if he could get God Almighty to write some hard and fast rules for political science, history, and economics, we would follow them.

Despite my deliveries in Porch Talk, writing is not talking.

As usual, I need PARTICIPATION. I do NOT need someone to make the Stormfront comment that they don’t get it. I have spent fourteen years and over three thousand articles finding out some methods of explaining the Mantra approach and Mantra thinking.

I have read tens of thousands of comments to find to when your mind is dribbling back to N&J or slipping on a crucial point.

If you ask me how I stand on slavery, I will ignore it because I have a lot to do and little energy to do it with.

I STUDY what you say and try to fill in cracks and understand where my explanation didn’t work.

That is what the PROFESSION of writing is about. It is not about expressing yourself, it about being UNDERSTOOD.

And it is never even NEAR perfect.

One commenter asked if anyone had looked into disappearing plots in BUGS.

Let me repeat this the hundredth time: BUGS is not a site where “someone” or “anyone” does anything.

“Anyone” is for general purpose bitching, and we don’t need that here.

If you have a proposal, DO it. Stormfront has had at least ten thousand no-question-this-will-conquer-the-world-if-SOMEONE-does-its.

If you will need help, GET IT STARTED and THEN ask for help, telling them what you have accomplished.

We got mixed up and took out a subject a few days ago about 9 AM, along with several comments on it, including White Rabbits.

This not a Jewish Plot. It was a screw up.

I wonder if the people who talk about “someone” have ever done anything themselves

Summer in South Carolina in 1952 was hot. So we listened to the Republican Convention outside on our car radio. Senator Robert A. Taft of Ohio, who would die the following year of cancer, was neck and neck with Dwight Eisenhower.

Have you ever noticed how the establishment always wins the close ones? In 1976 President Ford won a very similar squeaker against Reagan. Taft had been the conservative candidate in 1040, 1944, and 1948, and each time the establishment beat him and put in a semi-Democratic candidate.

Taft represented a point of view which disappeared altogether with his death. He had opposed extreme interventionism in the European War, and he opposed extended American commitments against Communism.

Actually, what he opposed was what I repeatedly called “military welfarism,” a term which is now for the first time being used.

You should y now take it for granted that the same Eisenhower who used the term “military-industrial establishment” was its greatest architect. He wanted American troops on European soil supplied by American taxpayers using weapons made by American industry .

In 1959, when Europe was on its feet industrially, Eisenhower renewed the old post-War contract that drafted American troops at American expense to go to Europe and protect them. By then Western Europe’s economy and its population outstripped the Soviet Union.

But by 1959, with Taft’s death, the Republicans Party upheld military welfarism as part of its Potemkin Patriotic policy.

Ron Paul is considered a real kook for saying that country which is collapsing under debt should not get into war after war.

Paul is throwback, but a very legitimate throwback.

I am reading War Through the Ages AGAIN. It was the basic textbook on military history at West Point back when military history was considered relevant for cadets. Nowadays it probably would get in the way of today’s Relevant Reading about Human Relations and how to turn down a queer without hurting his feelings.

There is an explanation of the difference between the strategy of the Roman Empire compared the last comparable Empire, that of Alexander and his father Phillip. The Roman Legion did not, like those short-lived strategies of Phillip and Alexander, begin with a string of uninterrupted victories:

“The system went on, steadily keeping abreast of changing conditions, and each defeat they learned what they had done wrong that time.” The strategy of Alexander, the book points out, ended almost immediately upon his death, and Greeks went back to the old phalanx. It was created and disappeared in a period of half a century.

The Roman system lasted at least five hundred years.

A lot of people know about the short sword. The pilum is seldom recognized by laymen. We have a pilum, the Mantra. We throw that spear and disorganize the enemy ranks. It is vital, but it is not part of the complicated strategy that occurs next, when the Legions go in in their patented formation and gut the enemy individually with short swords.

I am sure those years of development of the Roman Legion saw endless numbers of people saying exactly what we hear on BUGS, “This shoulder to shoulder, same weapons crap is SLAVISH. I want to step out of formation, scream my battle cry, and take on the enemy the way my forefathers did.”

“You know, back when they were losing.”

The Legion was not really slavish. In fact slaves, punished the way Roman citizen-soldiers were, would have died.

No, those who slowly evolved the Legions were not slaves. In fact, the first time citizen-soldiers crossed Rome’s border to go on attack, the soldiers sat down and refused to move until the leaders told them what it was all about.

We can compare our Mantra to the pilum. As I have said, THEN we use the short sword, and we STAY IN FORMATION.

Citizen-soldiers who were ruled by two elected consuls, each ruling on alternative days, formed this “slavelike” strategy.

They were rigidly trained and consistent:

“The Romans are successful …for their exercises are battles without bloodshed and their battles bloody exercises.”

One thing everybody knew about Napoleon was that he was a midget.

As usual the lesson I want to point out to you about this has nothing to do with Napoleon.

The man was actually dug up and autopsied!

But the story that he was about 4’10” tall made it into a quote from his autopsy report I once saw.

The word is now that they quoted a British length that made him 5’2” instead of the actual over 5’6”, which was actually slightly above average in his age.

You will probably find all of these somewhere in Google, each of which could be quoted to make your point.

It’s not as if nobody ever SAW Napoleon. Half of the British aristocracy went over and met him personally during the one year of peace under the Treaty of Amiens.

Simply the complete disagreement and movie after movie showing Napoleon as short — especially Time Bandits — makes it clear that somebody is DEAD wrong.

Once you ask “Why is information produced?” you have the answer: A midget Bonaparte is more INTERESTING than one of average height.

But what most people don’t ever understand is the POWER of “Why was this information produced?”

Most people before the Internet could not have imagined that leading experts and witnesses produced AUTHORITATIVE statement that he was midget or above average height.

People laugh at us when we explain HOW mistaken information is. And our entire world view is determined by information a lot harder to get hold of Nappy’s vertical.

I think the word is smarmy, somebody who is always smiling and not quite saying anything.

If Romney says anything, it will be after he has assured everybody how handsome Obama is and bring out the endless string of clichés required of respectable conservatism.

Gingrich is often stupid and wrong, but he gets it OVER with. He just says the required horseshit and then goes on to the subject.

Romney is the perfect image of the Republicans who runs as a non-Democrat. He smiles and he smiles and he smiles.

There may be an undercurrent of the Internet Age here. One of the great innovations of this age is TLDR — Too Long, Didn’t Read. This attitude may be getting to politics. In the 1850′s Lincoln or Douglas would have an audience that brought a couple of meals and expected a short speech to give hem at least two hours’ entertainment.

Now the standard respectability ritual, which varies about as reciting the Creed does in church, causes the audience to cough and get restless.

One can see Gingrich with a wrinkle in his suit and one does not associate him with a smile. The media emphasizes this because it has always demanded smarmy conservatives who repeat the Creed carefully and in full.

I wonder what Romney would be like with a single wrinkle in his jacket or with no hint of an apologetic smile on his face?

There is nothing to choose between a Gingrich or a Romney, or an Obama as president.

So maybe, just maybe, people are getting tired of sitting through the Creed and waiting the apologetic smile.

We use the Roman Legion as an illustration of our approach. One part of this is the short sword, which Romans used in their tight formations, up close and personal, to gut their enemies who could not get through the wall shield.

I see long essays –by OUR standards — on the “race does not exist” or “is a social construct”. The short sword version of a reply would be “So Hitler did not commit genocide?” or, better, “You are saying there is no such thing as genocide.”

This happens a lot. Commenters get wrapped up in making simple issues that could be handled by short sword into just what the other side wants.

This is a HARD discipline to learn. After years of debating, you are now learning a discipline.

It is like one we HAVE generally learned. Instead of talking about the evils of the white race, we simply point out that “You are JUSTIFYING genocide.” He is in the position of verifying what you said. That’s a short sword jab.

If you do not use the short sword jabs I have tried and found true in years of experience, you’re re exactly like a Legionnaire who gets pissed, steps out of the line, and tries to fight the man opposite him alone in the old style.

It is STUPID and it leaves me frustrated.

So LOOK for the short answers. If you don’t use them I don’t regard you as mistaken, I think you are a damned fool.

Faced with the Mantra, anti-whites pull their ultimate knife: the Crazy Nigger.

On SWARM you will see commenter after commenter quote an anti-white falling back on their one resource, their screaming nigger. The Mantra is exactly the kind of thing Mommy Professor appeals to his screaming niggers, or Hispanics, or whoever, to suppress.

So naturally one Mommy Professor yuppie after another goes into his Nigger Mode. He screams M–Fucka and sh** and all the other things we would be condemned for, such as “screaming nigger” language,

This brings a reaction from BUGSERS which astonishes these pseudo-black militants: “You’re not black“.

In the girly girl world of anti-whites, the only really MASCULINE figures are screaming niggers.

That scream works just fine on campus with respectable conservatives.

Not with us.

The major point this makes it CLEAR is that anti-whites base their whole power on threats from their pet minorities. But these recent shrieks also make it clear that we have dealt with real hostile minorities, and Mommy Professor’s are not the real thing.

So Mommy Professor’s little anti-whites invent them to provide the Ultimate Scare.

Which, one by one, Bugsers laugh at.

Gee, Mommy Professor doesn’t really know the real world!

Surprise, surprise!

How exactly would racial survival be effected?

That depends totally on how each new generation is produced. No one seems to have recognized that that is one of the most undecided issues of the next century,

The fact is that absolutely nobody can be elected if he has the slightest interest in future generations.

The official line in Public Choice is that, if ghostly spirits of Future Generations COULD appear to us, naturally they would WANT the better looks and higher intelligence and the emphasis of breeding for creativity.

But what could they OFFER in return?

Nothing.

Since Public Choice is based on bargaining between real interests, the whole concept of doing unto others as you would have them do unto you is, in the case of genetics, nothing.,

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you has a personal element. I would rather be competent than incompetent, intelligent rather than mentally weak, look better rather than worse.

But the Golden Rule does not apply to a  future generation in religion.

Public Choice Theory explains this perfectly: a future generation has no POWER,

Jesus insisted that there would be no future generations

But had he understood we would still be here two millennia later, do you think he would have said that the new reality should also be dealt with on the basis of the Golden Rule?

The Church agrees with Political Correctness that, when it comes to genetics, the Golden Rule is repealed.

Jesus specifically stated that the Golden Rule is not just a nice rule. He said that it is the Law and of the Prophets. It is even more beyond question that a person wants to look better and be an integral part of more creative and better looking people.

The Pauline insistence that everybody was going to be made sterile in his generation is now strictly for really sick puppies.

Every time I read comments it frustrates me that even BUGSERS seldom get the point I am making and wander off into comparisons and so forth. But comments is YOUR section, not mine.

For example I hate Yuppie trends. One thing a yuppie automatically does is show she’s a Soccer Mom. They then toss off the usual quote about how other Americans don’t like soccer because it is “diverse.”

Not one commenter considered this when I wrote, repeatedly, that soccer , hockey, basketball and La Crosse, plus about every other game outside the US and Britain, are the same game.

This hits them where they aren’t ready.

Suddenly they’re not being sophisticated the way Mommy Professor said soccer was.

But it will be long, cold time in the Eighth Circle of Hell before anybody but me notices it.

But, like the Mantra, my articles work in the long run on those who can hear me.

Many a person is astonished about how well the Mantra works in PRACTICE. So I wrote piece explaining that anti-whites are vulnerable because they are protected from all EFFECTIVE disagreement, which makes them suckers when the real thing comes along.

The piece was about the interviews with former slaves in the 1930s WPA Writers’ Project. They can’t deal with anyone bringing up the only example of actual slaves’ opinion of their masters, because it is not repeated, much like the 1948 Red Cross report which demolished the later Six Million Law.

The article was denounced as being anti-slavery.

This surely demonstrates that it’s not just anti-whites the anti-white suppression has taken out of the real world. That is what we refer here to as Stormfront Thinking, where the pro-white masses have exactly the media-type reaction to whatever is said that the anti-whites do.

Most people, including BUGSERS, cannot see this new perspective. But in BUGS SWARM I notice that, after reading a lot of my articles and getting out there in the fight, my approach gets reproduced, the real one.

Someone asked, “Have you ever spoken to a senator or congressman and spoken the mantra to him or her? I would love to hear a story from anyone who has done that.”

Of course I have.

They act like any other public figure. They agree with my point and then ignore it, like everybody else does.

I put “anti-white” into a speech for John Ashbrook, WITHOUT the required “and anti-Semitic.” Every other staffer opposed it, though they used the full phrase anti-white and anti-Semitic, regularly.

John put it in and no one noticed it, OPENLY.

One commenter asked me to do a piece on the Republican primary here on Saturday. As an exception to my usual ignoring of news and Jews.

South Carolina’s Republicans shame me.

They are, above all things, obedient. After Buchanan won the New Hampshire primary, I knew for sure that South Carolina would reject him.

South Carolina has the highest percentage of soldiers and of veterans of all the states.

They defy nobody.

I was raised in a state which defied the world on segregation and which seceded first. But in today’s Potemkin Patriot society, it is the state of Dole and Bush and Romney.

There is an old subpopulation here, one that will give Ron Paul the second place.

But the sons of the white trash are desperate to prove they are middle class, and that the world of William Buckleys and Miss Piggy need not be ashamed of them.

As I said in Part I, hockey, basketball, La Cross, basketball and most other popular sports are the same game: several people on each side, positions almost entirely exchangeable with each other, try to get a ball into a goal.

When you suddenly are called upon to describe baseball or football to a foreigner, you suddenly realize just how DIFFERENT they are.

And, take from one of those who did it at the Sevierville Conference, the explanation of the BUGS approach it no easier for pro-whites to absorb than for anti-whites.

Actually, it may be harder to explain to pro-whites, because they don’t have the experience of getting their teeth knocked out by the Mantra itself. The punch in the face we give to anti-whites tends to fix us in their minds.

But pro-whites do not have this jarring experience, so they go on theorizing.

Pro-whites have not spent their whole intellectual lives being horse’s asses, so they do not easily appreciate how anti-whites feel when they are exposed as horse’s asses. And unless they get off their theoretical perches talking to each other and get out there with us they will never know the shock we impart.

To repeat, I nearly cleared out Opposing Views on Stormfront but nobody would adopt my tactics. No one was even curious about them.

My old friend James Edwards had me on his show at first when he was getting started. I brought in twice as many listeners as the interview with Bay Buchanan. In fact, it was a six full years before James called on me again, once his parade of — celebrities? — began.

The only reason he had me back was because he had polled his listeners about who to have back, and I came out on top. The interview was exactly as if it were six years ago,. James had no idea what I had done since. Like all my interviewers except Truck Roy, he couldn’t even START the Mantra.

James though I was still trying to sell my 2004 book.

It is not that James is somehow a villain in this. The first thing a pro understands is that different people are seeking different goals. James is going for a sympathetic audience. His payoff has to be money and members. As with American football versus basketball/soccer, La Cross, hockey, and the rest, our system of scoring is entirely different, and it can only be learned playing the game.

Like everyone outside BUGS, in almost ANY movement, James’s program survives by getting people to listen for hours or to send in money. If he doesn’t keep regularly scoring goals he is out of business.

For soccer/football. hockey/La Crosse, etc. fans the complicated scoring and entirely different nature of positions in American football are bewildering and pointless. The average News and Jews listener doesn’t want to deal with our whole new methods of scoring.

Nor can he understand that, while developing a new game, we have to learn the scoring ourselves.

We are trying to plant the Mantra, and where it gets planted, you don’t need volumes sold.

When my Austrian wife first came to America, I had met her in South Africa, we were looking at a ball game on television.

She asked me, “How is baseball played?”

Well, this is easy, I thought. Only then did it hit me that the game I was raised with was one hell of a job to explain to someone who was not raised with it.

All the games my wife was familiar with like soccer or La Crosse or hockey or basketball were similar.

Each game consists entirely of getting a ball into a goal. In all of these games, what is called a “team” is really an indistinguishable group trying to hit the goal or block the goal or getting the ball to a teammate who can get in the goal.

One position in basketball, La Crosse, soccer or any of the others is excellent practice for any other. Entire books have been written about the history of halfbacks, or guards or tackles or ends in football. A pitcher in baseball is entirely different from a fielder or a shortstop.

A good soccer or basketball player can take any so-called “position” on the team. A pitcher or a halfback does not easily switch to being a shortstop or a tackle.

Try explaining all that in a short statement.

This is a giant difference, but I didn’t notice it until my new wife asked me to explain baseball to her.

BUGSERS do not realize how much training they have absorbed.

Just think about it, don’t TRY it.

Truck Roy, White Rabbit and I spent three hours at the convention just getting the audience’s feet damp about the BUGS approach.

Our goals are as different as the points in baseball and la basket soccer.

The question and answer in BUGS Swarm is absolutely opaque to those who have not been in BUGS.

Our real BUGSERS readily admit it often took them YEARS to catch on to the Mantra and Mantra Thinking.

I tend to ignore people with new proposals for BUGS for one overwhelming reason:

They’re talking theory.

The Mantra developed over decades while I was famous for beating the anti-whites in the open.

As one commenter pointed out years ago, I practically cleaned out the Opposing Views section of Stormfront all by myself.

BUT NO ONE FOLLOWED MY LEAD.

In a society where everybody preached “by their WORKS you shall know them” no one even THOUGHT about someone whose only product was RESULTS.

So I am not greatly interested in someone explaining that the Mantra is too long or other problems I have been frustrated by for decades.

One commenter even came with the gloriously original idea of calling the other Communists!

It was a well-meant discussion, but I have seen thousands of these on Stormfront.

The Mantra is too long.

Tell ME about it.

This problem is being addressed daily, but not by theorists.

We are FINDING, by EXPERIENCE, that key phrases like “anti-racist is a code word for anti-white” slam home in certain places and in certain ways.

I only put in “ASIA FOR THE ASIANS, AFRICA FOR THE AFRICANS, WHITE COUNTRIES FOR EVERYBODY” years after I realized that we needed to fix attention on the abrupt new issue at the outset.

Properly placed, many parts of the Mantra bring out the whole point.

PROPERLY PLACED.

But only one who is out in the field can do this.

After I announced that my Christmas present was a laming arthritis attack, one commenter told me that a bath was a better arthritis pain killer than medications.

Well, it was from a genuine BUGSER so I had to pay attention. I thought about it.

And, finally, decided to DO it.

So this January I took a bath.

It did help a lot with the pain.

But mostly it got rid of that flock of buzzards that used to be circling around me every time I went outside.

The truth of a rule may be shown by it having no exceptions, but it is more often demonstrated by how desperate the search for an exception is.

No matter how endlessly the paper hats get others to praise their bravery and modestly deny it, not one of the endless number I have met ever said that he had anything to do with the OUTCOME of the conflict he was part of.

Someone who walks around with a paper hat saying World War II Veteran is saying that he fought in a war whose only real result was turning one third of the human race over to the Communists.

To repeat, this is true of ALL paper hats. Korea ended up exactly where it started, Vietnam was lost as soon as the left turned to back their fellow Marxists. Vietnam was a replay of World War II, because it was decided at the desks of leftists.

And so on.

Even the old text on world military history at West Point made it a major point that one side is defeated when it DECIDES it is defeated. All the slaughters and artillery and medals are devoted to the same thing other propaganda is aimed at: CONVINCING.

All real wars are decided before the first shot is fired.

Paper hats are concerned only about themselves, how brave they were and how they can‘t be cowards because the government said so. But not ONE of the paper hats claims he had anything to do with historical, human RESULTS.,

Paper hats are useful — to those who know how to use them — as hostages. So Hitler was really really bad and Comrade Stalin had his points, if you don’t agree you are condemning all those brave men and women who fought against Hitler, and, incidentally, as allies of Stalin.

But when it comes to the real war, it is fought here, in convincing people.

No ten thousand medal winners even claim to have the effect that well-placed and disciplined words have on the real world

In Part I I explained why the ex-slaves interviewed in the 1930s WPA program had almost nothing bad to say about slavery.

My point has nothing to do with slavery. My point is that a side which controls communication grows ever more unrealistic.

That is why they cannot handle this WPA project. So they ignore it. As time passes the things one militantly ignores get to be a bigger and bigger stack insulating you from reality.

Reality, by its nature, has a lot of staying power.

I explained that this strange complimentary image of slavery in the only interviews with actual slaves, not by using it as an anti-slavery screed or as a neo-Confederate, but by simply addressing the reality. Why did these ex-slaves themselves produce this information?

First, because when they were interviewed they were old and ill.

My second point here is that this survey was conducted during the DEPRESSION.

There is a lot of truth in the joke the black comedian George Wallace made:

“Oh, yea, I know about slavery,

that was the last time all the black folks had JOBS.”

Anti-whites are so dedicated to the evils of the white world that they get utterly deaf to any inconvenient reality. I was explaining to a new Political Science PhD that one complaint against the apartheid regime in South Africa was that the government did not protect black labor against black immigration.

She had never heard that, but understood. Then she defended her Orthodoxy by replying, “Yes, but all those blacks only wanted to go to South Africa to work for food.”

My reply, which caused a roomful of laughs, was to say, naively, “You know, when you’re starving, food is pretty important.” The rest of the room was laughing, but to her this was the kind of statement they report to the European Thought Police.

In the desperate 1930s, an old black man might not see his condition as better then it would have been under slavery. You could fire an old black man in the 1930s when it was hopeless for him to find any job. At that time, even for favored groups, a JOB, a LIVING, had a priority none of Mom Professor Acolytes, as I show above, can even imagine.

Black immigration under apartheid was almost entirely FROM the New Independent African Republics and INTO South Africa because of a priority no anti-white can actually SEE.

An old, old black man in the late 1930s had been YOUNG when he was a slave and, the ultimate priority in the 1930s, he was SAFE.

Notice that I am not defending slavery. I am explaining realities that anti-whites cannot deal with because their only strategy is militant denial.

Year by year, because of this denial, any simple mention of basic truth, like the Mantra, hits them in areas in which they have never learned to cope

Under the New Deal, a project was set up to employ writers. To find something to pay them for, young writers were sent South to talk to actual ex-slaves. This was actually useful, because almost all the real slaves had died out.

It is interesting to note that, with all the discussion of the Civil War and slavery, no one in the New York Union League Club or in New England had the slightest interest in how the SLAVES felt about it. This was strictly government make-work policy which could not possibly pay its way from any reader interest in it.

I haven’t seen this study mentioned anywhere popular. The results were enormously frustrating for the earnest young liberals doing it. If you published it outside the United States right now, you would probably go to prison.

I can explain why the blacks were so kind to slavery and their slave holders. But a person whose reaction to a study that comes out the wrong way is to militantly ignore it, is very weak on the realities of the world.

That, in fact, is one the major advantages of Mantra thought.

Slavery had ended say 75 years before this study was made. There were very few blacks who were actually slaves by then, and I would bet good money that far more than half of those interviewed were lying. But every one of the hundreds of interviewees had know a lot of people who had been actual slaves, and they probably repeated what they had been told.

So I am using this to review slavery, as everybody else on both sides does, but also to examine why slave days were given such an embarrassing boost that frustrated the writers.

First of all, the old slaves were talking about a time when they were young With 1930 medicine, even at its best, old age was MUCH worse then than it is now.

Also, most of the children in that slave group probably didn’t know what slavery WAS. I distinctly remember when my mother told me there had been a war between the North and the South. Slavery is not what they remembered, so what DID they remember?

A child remembers being energetic and healthy, but he also remembers HOME. In the 1850s, when abolitionist preachers were making huge salaries in New England, an Irish child of ten who was crippled in an accident, a very common thing, was left to starve or as a burden on his parents.

So why was this information produced? First, because the ex-slaves were no longer young. No one surveyed the old Irishmen who had worked as kids amidst the machinery that paid New England’s abolitionists’ handsome incomes

Second, this survey was conducted during the Depression.

–To Be Continued

I can’t find it, but one of our BUGSERS went into a pub, found a bunch of degree-holding anti-whites putting down a girl who stood up for our race, and he took them on and took them out.

He said, “Anyone who hast outgrown his college education knows that anti -racist is a code word for anti-white.”

Almost immediately, instead of those prigs ganging up on the girl, he had the whole room on his side. It was a major triumph.

And the commenter TOLD US that it was a triumph.

His method throws light on the discussions of whether one should use the R word or part of the Mantra.

Once again, let me emphasize that the goal of other pro-white sites is necessarily raising money and raising memberships. Only by doing that can they make a living and have numbers to cite.

BUGS has one criterion: success in giving out the world view anti-whites have imposed on the world.

It goes back to the tired, tired, old joke about a guy who jumps into a cab and says, “What’s the best way to get to Carnegie Hall?” and the cabby answers, “Practice, practice, practice.”

People keep asking me how I developed the Mantra. The ONLY reply is practice, practice, practice.

But practice is useless if you do not have a feel for the target.

Other comments may say “I use the argument that …”

But that does not answer the question. The question is, did you hit the target?

BUGSERS begin where theorizers stop.

The brilliant gamut above did a major job. But what followed? Did he use the attention to give everyone the real world view of ALL white countries and ONLY white countries are being immigrated out of existence.

And that is a relatively easy case to make. It is the assimilation, i.e., INTERMARRIAGE, which is the line they cannot have crossed. is a safe topic by comparison. If we cut immigration to a trickle and just marry in the non-whites we have now, there will be no white race.

You never hit the target dead center enough to suit your rifle coach, which can really tick you off if you are more accurate than HE is and he still says YOU aren’t living up to what YOU could do.

So I congratulate you with jubilation when you pull off a coup like this one, Then I want to know what happened NEXT.

We are not theoretical here. BUGS is interested in results from the whole front, and ONLY the front.

A commenter asked me about the use of the word “racist, so I said that we speak in terms of pro-white and anti-white only, and do not use the word “racist” except in “anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.’

This caused a small discussion of what I meant by that.

In my experience, all rules of conduct have exceptions.

Another commenter asked a related question: are we EVER to change the wording of the Mantra?

The bottom line is not Bob’s Words, but whether it works or not. One person pointed out a case in which he used the term “racist,” but he did NOT point out whether it WORKED or not. You can take out my rules and stamp on them if it WORKS, just let me know and I will, too.

Remember that using the Mantra is a lot like reeling in a big fish. Don’t give them ANYTHING that they can draw you off the genocide point with. My advice on that is good because I’ve been at this for decades and have kept my eye on the ball, the one ball, and nothing BUT the ball.

But my whole hope is that this won’t stop with me. I hope you make me out of date with your own experiences.

You can try using racist, but look CAREFULLY at the RESULT. Go over the exchange later to see if it gave them some loophole, some relief.

The same is true of the Mantra. When I stated it with my whole heart back when I had the energy, I think it got to people. But if someone just reads it off dully, as one TV announcer did, it hits a lot less people. I had not fully appreciated this until a commenter mentioned it.

If you need to change something to fit the time and place, do so, but do it CAREFULLY.

We have already begun to see results from getting across things like “Asia for the Asians, Africa for the Africans, White Countries for Everybody” and “anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.” You may find, after STUDYING these results, that you will have a feel for the time when getting the reader’s or readers’ full attention on one point is more important than shoving in the whole 222 words

When we first got started, people tried to “adjust” the Mantra. The results stank.

But your seniority is now growing. The discussions I see about what you have learned out in the field are dead on target.

The fact is that basic training is inviolable rules because the recruit is likely to let the grenade go off in his hand. As he progresses, it becomes more and more guidelines and the understanding that he is getting into the command himself.

If you can make anything but my exact method WORK, you must not only do so, but you must TELL US about what works. Right now you are somewhere between basic training and noncom training.