In response to “Why the Only Answer to the Mantra is Labels and Insults,” some commenters brought up their problems with their families or friends.

I have the same problem. I can’t go through the whole Mantra daily with everybody I see every day.

So I use “anti-white.”

It very seldom comes up that one must describe anybody’s political viewpoint, but I use “anti-white” as often as I can. I drop it in routinely. By now very few people I know even try to deal with it.

I will often say, “Well, he’s as anti-white as you are, but he’s conservative on other issues…”

This is NOT the Mantra. When I tell you how to use the Mantra, we all know what the two standard responses will be.

But you have to develop “anti-white” for yourself, and the results will be fascinating to me. The first thing to remember is that it is a descriptive term, not an argument. More often than not, you will have the satisfaction of their swallowing it without comment.

That is quite a coup. You are dealing with family or friends to whom you have already described the Mantra, so “anti-white” is as good as a repeat. If someone is listening who has not heard the Mantra, you get to repeat your argument.

“An antiwhite is someone who wants the white race to disappear”

What I want to emphasize here is that there is no standard way to handle this, because, at long last, we have something for which no programmed response is available. You are now ready to go out on your own.

You’ll learn to handle the responses, and I get to sit here and see what you learn out in the field.

There is nothing wrong with losing. I certainly didn’t develop the Mantra over years without a LOT of embarrassments. Every word in the rigid full Mantra is the result of hundreds of incidents, most of them embarrassing.

Now it is time for our seminar members to use “anti-white” and learn their own rules.

Obviously, “anti-white” is not something you will use where it is costly or dangerous. But with family and friends, it reminds them of where you stand and what you said.

I keep pointing out that the media have found a way to make paycheck conservatives their greatest asset. There is the “Both Sides” myth, and after conservatives have raised money and been the opposition for a couple of decades, the media announces that some “noted conservative commentator” has switched sides on it; sides are agreed; and any dialogue on the subject is closed because the argument is now “extremist” or “divisive.”

So paid conservatism has become a stage of the leftist process.

But I always have to say that conservatives make their living by fanatically declaring that today is a disaster, but everything that led to the situation today is holy. I say “anything before January 1, 1971 is holy” because that was the month Roe versus Wade was decided.

My opinions on an issue except white genocide must be strictly my opinion. This is another area where mental DISCIPLINE is required of BUGS that few others could even understand. Conservatives are steadily backing away on every other social issue, but anti-abortion is the perfect loser’s stand. Conservatives will be anti-abortion for many decades.

Anyone on BUGS must understand that we are speaking of power here, not rambling along on hysterical issues. Abortion is the perfect loser’s issue, because it raises huge amounts of money and expends almost all the emotion that would be directed toward saving our race.

And, most important of all, all that energy and money has not the slightest effect on the issue itself.

Joe Sobran, who was a fanatical pro-lifer, mentioned to me that there is a definite anti-white strain in the pro-life movement. As experienced activists, he and I could FEEL that without having to explain it. In fact, an experienced professional often feels something first, then analyses it.

Another thing my experience tells me is that organizations are destroyed constantly by those who become a part of them and then tear the whole cause apart by getting fanatical on their group’s refusing to take their stand on an issue, one which very often is outside the group’s purview, and then wrecking the whole thing.

Abortion is the one thing that is likely to destroy our effort. And where you have walking, talking anti-abortion bombs walking around, you will also have those women whose first loyalty is to “women,” whateverthehell that is supposed to mean. Both loyalty to women and anti-abortion are perfect issues substitutes for the natural drive for racial survival.

To a membership organization a member is a member and a check is a check.

BUGS does not need any human time bombs. I have personally encouraged them to go elsewhere.

Mantra thinking seems simplistic because, instead of leading one on a flight of imagination or a showoff of one’s Intellectualism, it digs into the question at the ground level.

If “published” discussions always reach one conclusion, it is like all the gang members telling the same story.
Every single study on racial busing in schools yields precisely the same result: No matter whether it went smoothly or there was rioting, no matter where it occurs, the result is always that it helped minorities a little and did not harm whites.

Helped minorities, but only a little. When the Civil Rights Commission did a study which its Chairman Fleming told the staff, “It must show desegregation WORKS,” even some of the workers there leaked his orders and it was reported in Time Magazine, fanatically anti-white though Time was.

But studies cannot show that busing, which can put white kids on the school bus four hours a day, has any bad effects on whites. So all reports avoided Fleming’s mistake and reported modest improvement for minorities, and said white kids, no matter how exhausted, had no problem with it.

And everybody, including pro-whites, tend to accept that.

All accepted sources will tell you that IQ has been increasing steadily because more people have more practice with written tests in each generation. Genetics has absolutely no effect on IQ.

Naturally, as an interrogator, I assume all that is untrue. Anyone who concludes huge low IQ families and sterile smart people has been driving average IQ down is anaziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews. As usual, the Buckleys of the world led the way by firing a staffer who had concluded in a paper on schools that have lower IQ immigrants having a lower average IQ.

But for people who study News and Jews and do not think Mantra-style, this obvious conclusion is reached only when a news item, like that firing, brings it up.

Imagine how far they could have gotten in debates if they took each statement of “fact” by the other side and took it apart this way. No cop would get away with running into the station and shouting, “I just had some news that shows that Lefty tells me whatever he thinks will make him innocent.”

Yet no one, no one, dissects establishment arguments this way. Whenever Global Warming is mentioned, I discuss how many of the people who discuss it depend on it for a living and articles.

Which indicates to me that no real research on it will ever be done.

I do the same thing with the Holocaust. I talk about the Holocaust Industry. I talk about the giant investment Wordists have in it.

All my stuff is legal in Europe.

I’ve even said, “As an American, I was raised to believe that anything any government requires you to believe has something wrong with it.”

Even that is legal.

Mantra Thinking and Mantra Logic can tear down walls nothing else can even reach.

BUGSERS are now in a position to understand why I claim so much credit.

To start with, you were startled when you discovered that the Mantra was damned near magic.

Next you ran into an endless stream of people on your own side who denounce it.

You can easily empathize with what my life has been like. I ran into fallacy after fallacy, and each time I also ran into its paid pushers and its paid opponents.

I soon realized that the same mentality chooses both the pros and the antis.

After all that work in Intelligence, including combat, I found that what mattered was destroying the enemy by embarrassment. The collapse of the Soviet Empire was accomplished not by nukes, but by faxes.

But anybody who got ahead as a professional opponent of the system could only do so if the other side was comfortable with him.

This is what I call The Buckley Rule. So in our system, all Big Time opponents avoid anything like the Mantra like the Plague. Nobody has noticed this simple Rule but me.

And I make the system very, very uncomfortable. So I spent my life pushing memes that the Buckleys hated worse than the outright enemy.

National Review never mentioned that every Workers’ Paradise had to shoot escapees. Why?

The Buckley Rule. That is an Outlaw Point, one which destroys the enemy in one sentence.

I have made this point here a hundred times: This was the kind of logic that destroyed the USSR. This was the logic that violated The Buckley Rule so blatantly that President Reagan found that his paycheck appointees took out, “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this Wall!” THREE TIMES behind his back in preparing his speech!

I endangered my life, but I finally discovered that most people who win heroic fame will not risk their paychecks. I was a constant, vital factor in bringing down the Soviet Empire in an endless number of quiet battles with the paychecks.

And I am tired.

I have said a hundred times that both Communists and professional anti-Communists hated the argument that Communism is totally discredited by the simple fact that it had to shoot escapees.

I have waited for years for somebody to say exactly the same thing about multiracialism.

A simple, deadly mime: Everybody loves multiracialism, and any escape is illegal.

No one has made this simple point. Comments on the No-Escape Communist policy always consist of discussions of Communism.

I want some of you to learn this TYPE OF THINKING, not just to agree with me.
You now have the field experience to really understand The Buckley Rule. You have been mauled by those who have learned to succeed by never using a Judo Punch on our mortal enemies.

You are now in a position to understand my THINKING, not just my opinions.

No critic of Bob’s Mantra has ever replied with anything but insults and labels.

The above sentence should read, “No critic of Bob’s Mantra has ever replied with anything but insults and labels.”

The difference is the quotes.

I wish I were quoting a BUGSER who isn’t Bob.

I have gotten paid, and punished, for coming up with stuff all my life.   Today I literally live for you doing this yourself using Mantra Thinking.

I love it when YOU come up with Mantra Thinking.  It beats the hell out of Christmas.

I have written endlessly about Reagan had to put, “Mr.  Gorbachev, tear down this wall” back in his own speech THREE TIMES because his staff kept cutting it out behind his back.   Imagine how much trouble I had insisting that the fact that every Communist state shot anyone who tried to escape was fatal to them was attacked.

So instead of just reacting to my mention of Communism to talk about Communism, why hasn’t any BUGSER said, “If diversity  is so great, why do we have white flight?   Why must diversity be enforced?”

You need to think of WHY I say these things!

When someone praises his “working outside the box,” a BUGSER will wonder, “What in the HELL are we doing in a BOX?”

Look at our comments and see how often they talk about the box.

Meanwhile, the mainstream media talks about the hundreds of thousands who have been on Stormfront or watched White Rabbit videos versus the barely 400 on the White House petition.

But no BUGSER has pointed out the OBVIOUS difference.   People who agree with the petition are AFRAID to sign the petition.   The only answer they will  get is labels and insults.

USE the points I make!

This is a seminar, not a stream of thought vacation.

I have mentioned here many times how often a writer hears people say wistfully, “I can SAY it, why can’t I WRITE it?”

My reply would be, “Can you fix a television set?”

They would say no and I would go: “If you can’t just go and fix a TV set from natural talent, why do you think you can write without learning how?”

But, as has happened so often in my life, maybe my perfect reply was wrong, or at least incomplete.

Most who say they can say it really can’t say it. What I mean is that what they know is what would pass on an exam. But saying something so that someone, who doesn’t already know it, can understand it is a whole different ball game.

Expertise gets you a job, but explanation rules the world.

I have also talked a number of times about the creation of the Federal Senior Executive Service, which put all grades above GS-15, army colonel level, into a single category. It abolished the old “supergrades”, GS-16 to GS-18. Formerly one began as a specialist down on the bottom rungs and then got promoted, inside the same specialty, all the way to GS-18.

Meanwhile, back on planet earth, real businesses would hire a successful big bakery executive to run a publishing firm. At a certain point the point is not how many kinds of bread you can name, but how you can manage a large group of people.

So in the real world executives cease to be specialists.

Which brings us back to explanations.

In the big leagues you are dealing with a congressman who has stuff going on in two committees and on the Floor at the same time. You cannot deal with somebody on that level by delivering a lecture.

The moment Ron Paul found out I had been a senior staffer, his whole attitude changed. The whole talk took about three clock minutes.

We talked about John Ashbrook’s murder, his own prospects and a couple of other things.

Until you learn explanation, you stay way down in the chain of command.

To rest my eyes, I need something simple to listen to music on.

Sounds easy in the Days of the Internet.

But a Google search assumes I am interested in iPods. There are ads for iPods. There are no doubt interesting discussions of the latest in iPods, what is going on in the World of iPod.

I have told you a number of times that my siblings are even older than I am. They are all able to use the Internet ONLY because I stayed a night with each of them and showed it to them.

I EXPLAINED it.

I explained it, not as entertainment or The Latest Thing, but as a wholly new and different thing.

The first thing I taught them was control-alt-delete. Back then it just plain got you out of anything you were doing, and that is what they wanted to know first.

When you get on a plane, the first thing they tell you about is the escape hatches.

Once they knew how to get out, my siblings were ready to go in.

VERY carefully.

In an age when Kindergarteners use computers, introducing people to them who used to wear earphones to hear crystal radio requires a thousand tons of empathy.

Our job is different, but the problem is the same. We have to talk, not about the best way to put things that a real person in a real world would naturally want to hear. We have to go where THEY are.

Stormfront can talk about the latest in racial solutions and news. That’s where their audience is.

We have to go out into the instantly hostile world where the general population is.

They have no interest in our iPod, they have no idea what it is, and they have a suit of armor on against having it explained to them.

It’s sort of like teaching a math class to a roomful of juvenile delinquents who still have their handcuffs on.

In the article, I discussed how there might be a sequel to White Rabbit’s great “AntiRacist Hitler.”

The discussion following was my dream.

Asgardian explained how I was probably simply wrong:

“Coach, some things aren’t MEANT to have a sequel. I feel ARH is probably best as a standalone entity. It will be that “singular reference.” I believe we can build off its momentum, but we need to look to another “property” to use as a spring board. ARH cannot have a sequel. It said everything it had to say. It GOT THE POINT ACROSS. A sequel to ARH I fear would have negative, unintended consequences.”

John White and others keep asking me to be more clear on my points.

But if you read Asgardian’s quote above you will see that we hve something unique here, but it is not a Chinese-type – The Way.  It is an Aryan type “direction.”   It does not surprise me at all that you have a problem with that.   I don’t fully understand it myself.

Let me say this: What we  are looking for is not Perfection.  I defined Perfection, which is the ideal of Oriental Philosophy, as “A 100 in a second grade spelling test.”

Mommy Professor has developed a wall against the Aryan mind.   That wall is a kind of Perfection called Progressivism, which moves toward Perfection.

A STATIC Perfection.

It is a world in which Mommy Professor sits under a banyan tree and is worshipped while children faint from hunger around him.

That is where the Church has gone.

What Christ said  was, “Do unto others are you would have them do unto you.   That is the Law and the Prophets.”

But one cannot build an overwhelmingly powerful, continuing Church, an institution, on that.

Institutions  survive with Oriental Rules and Regulations.   All institutions go Oriental.

The best example for me is The Lord’s Prayer.

The point Jesus was making when he composed the “Our Father” was that you should only pray for what you need, and quit.  He said, “It is enough to call a fish a fish.”

Jesus noted that some people think they can attain salvation by “much speaking.”   So he gave them an EXAMPLE of how to ask God for what you need, an unbelievably short prayer.

An unbelievably short prayer in the eyes of every priest-laden religion of Jesus’ time.

And of today’s’.

Today that short prayer is the epitome of attaining salvation by much speaking.  Penitents repeated it thousands of times while they starved and whipped themselves in the name of the Golden Rule.

That’s what institutions do.   That’s what Mommy Professor does.

So when I talked about the “sequel” to AntiRacist Hitler, which is what an institutionalist does, it would be the natural blind alley he would go into, Asgardian pulled me  out.

That is what a real seminar is all about.

            While White Rabbit was formulating AntiRacist Hitler, I heard something familiar in his voice.  It was the same as I had on the Mantra.  It was simple inability to explain a concept that was so powerful.

The ending is a great example.   It ends with Hitler having a wry smile on his face and saying, “How could that have happened?” and fadeout.

Only a BUGSER would understand what that ending entailed.   Others would feel they had the audience and it was time to smash the point home.   The Torchlight Parade, the BBC-like Social Message.

If I had had the slightest idea that White Rabbit would do anything of the sort, he would have called the South Carolina psychiatric board and demanded they get to me before I actually harmed myself.

Like that ending, our genius lies in getting it just right, like that ending.   But how could White Rabbit EXPLAIN such points to me without sounding like he considered me an idiot?

The problem is that anyone outside BUGS ACTS like an idiot.   Since that is  certainly understood by WR and by me, an explanation of subtlety is made difficult to state reminding the other BUGSER about the “Duhhhs.” which is always right on the edge of an insult.

“How Europeans Took Over America” has shot upwards since “AntiRacist Hitler” came out.  People are beginning to realize that a WR  YouTube will be FUN to watch.   The beginning of “How Europeans Took Over America is longer than the entirety of many of the most popular YouTubes.  People who go there from ARH will be willing to sit through that now.

How in the HELL can anybody raised in our numbskull days make a SEQUEL to ARH?

One thing that is sure is that WR will not only have trouble making the sequel, he will have an impossible time explaining it.

Some commenters have asked for comments to stay open for each article.

We should develop something, so to begin with, those who wish to comment on earlier articles, all the way back to 1998,could put in the LINK to that page under their screen names, and nothing else, in the current article.

I would like that.

  One thing I want to get you doing is to stop looking for brilliant plots and rethink the basics.   You are about the only ones left who can.

For example, what if the son of an US admiral crashed during WWII and did the following :

“He sought out the enemy.”

The first  thing he said to them was. “You give me medicine and I’ll give you information.”

He told an American magazine that was exactly what he did, with the NAZIS?”

He would have faced at least a hearing for treason in any real army.

But the man I am taking about was not in WWII.     He was in Vietnam.

He was awarded a silver star, became a Republican senator, and was the  respectable conservative nominee  for president in 2008.

This is Rule One of Mantra Thinking:  While you communicate the  same message over and over your mind does the opposite.   You step out of the box and rethink the thinking which got us here.

This is desperately needed, or Bob would not be the only one to repeat the above  incident in its NAZI context.

I would not have been alone during the Cold War in pointing out that the Berlin Wall was built because  every other People’s Democratic Republic always did the same  thing.    East Germany  made  the New York Times because it, alone of all Iron Curtain countries, did not routinely shoot all escapees until 1961.

Because the New York headlined the Berlin Wall, National Review had to talk about.   National Review never  mentioned the kill on sight rule that surrounded the one third of humanity before and after 1961, before or after.

I was the first and only economist to state in a seminar before Nobel Prize winners, that a country is rich or poor, not because of its territory, not because of pieces of paper like the Constitution, but because of the PEOPLE who inhabit it?

My point was fully accepted and promptly forgotten.

That’s the kind of thing I was a professional in doing.

I am the Semmelweis of politics.

But Semmelweis died insane.

It made me a good living, but I did not enjoy feeling like the only surviving  political mind on earth.

Iceknight comments:

” As a thirty something, I always find it such a fascinating contradiction how Bob shapes most of his ideas from a bygone age long before the internet revolution – yet these same ideas represent the revolutionary cutting edge of today and will completely redefine our future.”

It’s not a contradiction. One of my most fundamental messages here is and has been how to tell the future, and how NOT to tell the future. I was READY for the computer age or whatever else happened.

In fact, by definition, if one can see how to prepare for the future from experience in human affairs, it should make little difference WHEN he got that experience.

That is the reason I keep warning you about how slippery planning for such and such in the future can be. I was warning people against waiting for “Torchlight Parades” over a decade ago.

That is why I read so much old science fiction and do my Futurology “3-D.”

One gets PAID to be a Futurologist exactly the way one gets paid to be a respectable conservative or the way one gets research grants: You deliver the message money-people want delivered.

Futurology grants are not granted in the future, and no one keeps track of the billions given to Sovietologists for total failure or for absurd Futurology.

We depend on the future. It is our whole concentration. “Experts” are playing a game in which the bigger a crisis they cause, the quicker they get promoted.

Nothing matters less to a Futurologist than the actual future.

The future is our ONLY serious concern.

Is what I just said “esoteric”?

Not at all. It is exactly what Iceknight is pointing to.

“Torchlight Paraders” will TTGH if I tell them that genes are likely, in the not too distant future, to become a matter of choice.

If our Mantra Movement had not occurred, the open statement that one wants white genes to save the white race would have become more and more a matter of extremism.

Whatever happens in the future, the attitude we set is critical. This worked in the Past Ages when I had my experience, and it works today and I would have concluded the same no matter what age I lived in.

Thanks, Iceknight.

I read a lot of old history books. The fascination of this is its 3-D nature. The writers are talking about people in their past, and what I am getting is a view of what they thought in their time.

One writer wrote that something was “as modern as Marx, as timely as the Webbs.” The Webbs founded the old British Labor Party, with its absurd nationalizations. Even neo-Marxists look upon Marx as ridiculously outdated.

But that was the future as a very mainline writer around 1955 saw it.

I am now watching episodes from “Science Fiction Theater,” a TV show from 1955 to 1957. See a few of those or read some old history books and you will laugh out loud at the “inevitable future” on race or anything else.

But SF Theater was a good show and it tried to be realistic.

As I have pointed out and from my experience will have to repeat a dozen times before anybody starts thinking about the point, membership organizations must say what people want to hear. Their assumptions about the future must jibe with what their members want it to be.

From all my thought about the future, the only thing that one can implant that will definitely affect the future is an attitude. It is hard for most people to believe how firmly the idea that the white race had to be wiped out was implanted.

Now, due to us, this attitude is largely exploded. We are well on the way to making the preservation of our race one of the givens of the future.

I can’t quite believe it!   At

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKDeyuM0-Og&feature=youtu.be

White Rabbit’s AntiRacist Hitler, I read some 116,000 hits, four thousand thumbs up and NO thumbs down!

The anti-whites have seen these huge thumbs up our You Tubes keep getting, and the warning has gone out.

Since then, I have see only one of our YouTubes where the thumbs down have gotten a thin majority.

I looked at one of the sites one of  with the pretty girls reciting the Mantra (out of purely intellectual concern, of course), and found it had 160,000 views, 4000 thumbs up and NO thumbs down!

Am I reading this wrong?  What has happened to the anti-white Chain of Command, or Robot Board?

Hate — The other side’s “motivation.”

Immigration — All nations are created by immigration.   All nations are destroyed by immigration.

Temperance — The opposite of both heavy drinking and teetotaling.

Bravery = Recklessness + Luck

Reporter – A person whose whole goal life is spent trying to get information first that the whole world would have known within a hour if he had never been born.

Idealists — The fanatics on your side.

Modern — Becoming dated

Paranoid — Something that people keep calling me behind my back

Perfection — One hundred on a second grade spelling test.

Judicial matters — That which ignorant people constantly mislabel as “constitutional issues.”

Secession — A right which saved the Soviet Republics and might have saved the American States.

Right — Something one can do despite the fact that it bothers others and is dangerous.

White Rabbit was telling me what to expect on the YouTube results of “AntiRacist Hitler.”

At one point he talked about the fact that it was a “ten-minute presentation.”   With his experience it is a given to him that there is a fundamental relationship between the exact length of the You Tube and how you measure traffic.

I had to deduce that.   When White Rabbit talks about professional work on the net or Brian talks about what is wrong with my computer setup, they constantly use expressions they never considered might be new to me.

Until that moment, I had no idea that the there was much of a clear and definite relationship between the length of a YouTube and its popularity.

It is crucial that you not plunge into my ignorance or their assumed mistake.   It is critical that I make my point here:   Explanation is a complete field in itself.

I am able to explain things very, very well because I have spent a lifetime learning how.   Practically nobody is able to understand that.   That is my unique specialty.

A practical example: BUGS is dedicated to explaining the basic truth.   All membership organizations have to be dedicated to an entirely different goal:   They must say what potential members want to see someone say.

Remember that membership organizations live in a world of jungle survival.  If they do not say what their people want to hear they will cease to exist.

Only BUGS can do what I have done all my life: say not just what our sided wants to hear but what other people NEED to understand.

Our Mantra approach is based on that of the Roman Army. This was expressed later by the maxim, “One barbarian can usually defeat one civilized soldier. Ten civilized soldiers can hold their own against ten barbarians. No number of barbarians can hold against a hundred civilized soldiers.”

We have proven this absolutely. The Mantra discipline has charged right into the middle of them and then fought as a solid mass in the very midst of thousands of enemies and left them screaming helplessly.

We have gone worldwide by using the Roman opening, when they marched up in solid formation, threw their pila, spears, at the enemy to break up what little the enemy had of formation and then went in as a solid block.

I am sure that the first Romans who proposed such a type of combat were ridiculed. The Old Soldiers would tell them how Real Men don’t hang back shoulder, but each Real Man goes in berserking on his own, the more berserk the more glorious.

I tried for many years to get pro-whites interested in this method of warfare I had developed. Now it has proved itself.

But there is more to this discipline.

Untold numbers of armies have won a battle by going in in formation, and then being defeated when they broke formation when the enemy ran away. You who have read military history cannot count the number of times a great victory was won and then lost when the military broke up and went for the enemy’s baggage trains and camp followers.

I see that happening with us now. When you stun the anti-whites with our Mantra, you feel the thrill of victory. As the enemy howls all the predictable justifications of genocide, we want to make points about being bussed or affirmative action or minority crime or other things we have been bursting to complain about.

By the time these other points have been aired, we are right back into the old argument. People will not remember the argument as running headon into the real world of white genocide. All that is gained is lost.

The ONLY point of a Mantra Debate is to make Mantra points. Don’t comment here on other peoples’ points or how well somebody attacked some other matter.

Every discussion is a chance to make more Mantra points. It is very hard to learn how to act when an army realizes how completely this discipline has routed the enemy. That is where the lifetime, real, old soldiers distinguish themselves from those who have not been on the field before.

Mantra discipline is not just what you do, but what you DON’T do.

            My Sunday Meanderings

Definitions from the Martian Dictionary:

“Fascists call all disagreement Communist.   Communists call all disagreement Nazi.

“Oriental – noun – a member of one of the non-green races.”

“Female — A pleasantly lumpy human.”

“Dictatorship — noun — “one man, one vote,” where the man is specified.

“Hard vacuum — noun — The softest thing in the universe.

Rush Hour — A time and place where nobody rushes.

“Democracy — A society where the people think they rule.

“Franks — A people who had a lot of Gaul.

“Objectivity — The opinion of the one guy in the room who has a gun.

“Truth — See “Objectivity.”

“Defeat — A noun for losers, a verb for winners.

“Jewish — Something a little bit red is called reddish, something just a bit blue is bluish.   So calling an Orthodox Rabbi “Jewish” is really strange.

“Religion — Either Ultimate Truth or the world’s largest and oldest protection racket.

“Englishman — A German trying to be a Frenchman.

“Prophetic — Ben Franklin said that the proper symbol for America was the turkey, and he died when the Federal Government was only a year old.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKDeyuM0-Og&feature=youtu.be

It is a masterpiece of propaganda, the masterpiece among our pros.

It is highly watchable, for once I simply enjoyed a piece on my level. Lord that was a pleasure after all these years trying to get the slightest hint of real political warfare into pro-whites.

I will be saying more, but for now just go to the link. You will watch it through because it is entertaining.

THE pro job!

It has occurred to me that the one fundamental difference between membership organizations and BUGS is that they have to be devoted to tactics, whereas we concentrate on strategy.  That makes us pretty uppity towards the flakey masses in membership organizations.

To a certain extent, we earn our uppity attitude.   We get no reward for this, so we should be proud of what we do.

On the other hand we must understand why membership organizations HAVE to cater to flakes.   If Dave or Don don’t keep them entertained, other outfits will be glad to take them off their hands, with their checks.

This leads to some differences that are so extreme they are almost comical.   The membership outfit is not going to do something miraculous like being pro-white and having a hundred and fifty  thousand people sign up for it as Stormfront has done unless it does a terrific job of holding in everybody from religious lunatics to libertarians.

We, on the other hand, demand to get rid of anyone who can take offence at something else and take his toys and go home (TTGH).   I offer you over fifty years of organizing experience, and this kind of person has destroyed hundreds of otherwise healthy groups.

We chop the TTGH off the way a old combat surgeon would go after a limb with gangrene in it.

TTGH IS gangrene.

In the Darwinian world of membership organizations, you can’t do that.

In the membership groups, the Leader must keep up his image.  I don’t.

I wrote an article saying that you never use “You are justifying genocide.”   That was my frustration from one debate.  David or Don or Paul Fromm cannot afford overstatements.   I truly do not give a damn what it makes me look like if I fix “You are justifying genocide” in your mind.

The point is not Bob, the point is to add “You are justifying genocide” to the regular, endlessly repeated list of things that are clearly driving anti-whites up the wall.

I read one anti-white after another attacking the Mantra by repeating the old whites did bad things.

Then I wait for you to do what I have asked, then begged, and now pleaded with you to do a hundred times: Say flatly that they are JUSTIFYING genocide.

No way!   Not one single person ever says that!   I feel like I am back when I couldn’t get anyone to use the Mantra!

What is this solid, stupid resistance to the smashing response?

Mantra, then half of them talk about the crimes of the white race the way Goebbels talked about the Jews, next a non-retard pro-white who has dealt with this a hundred times POINTS IT OUT!

What is WRONG with my team?