Archive for January 5th, 2005

The “This is 2005″ Approach

If you want to know the latest Yuppie line, look at AOL.

Right now their line is that low carbohydrate “fad” is yesterday. The 2005 fad, they say, has something to do with spaghetti.

I use Atkins because it works. But it is a nightmare for the whole multibillion-dollar “science” of nutrition. All their endless and detailed instructions on a “balanced” diet are thrown right out the window.

As I pointed out before, a statistically significant number of men have had to live live on nothing but fat meat for months in the Arctic. They got isolated and 1) you can’t grow a vegetable garden in the Arctic in January, even a little one, and 2) there are no skinny animals in the Arctic.

They lived on FAT, solid cholestrol meat.

And the official survival courses have pointed out for at least four decades that nobody came out of this months-long solid cholestrol diet less healthy than he went in.

Nobody.

So now we begin the endless procession. Every month somebody will tell us that low carbohydrates is Yesterday’s Thing, A Fad.

I remember when vitamin pills were Yesterday’s Thing, a Fad. All the MDs swore that for deeply scientific reasons a pill containing vitamin D was nothing like a Balanced Diet.

Actually enriched bread and a vitamin pill beat the hell out of a Balanced Diet. How do I know?

Because I have spent a lot of time outside the Enriched Bread Circuit. You know, those Glorious Third World places where there are no artificial ingredients.

You can die in places like that. One person living in a place like that wrote me he had bleeding gums. I wrote him it was probably scruvy. I said, “these things happen.” He took vitamin C and his bleeding gums stopped bleeding.

So do you want to live in the real world or do you want the latest Yuppie thing?

Me, I’m getting a little tired of saying, “that’s dumb” to incurable adolescents.

“Race doesn’t exist” and “Quakers are saints” and all the rest of it. Am I the only sane one left standing?

2 Comments

Quaker Morality

A lot of people feel that if they simply don’t use the power they have, they are innocent.

So the Quakers feel that if they commit no violence at all, they are innocent of the shedding of human blood.

This is in perfect accordance with Confusionist morality which says, “DO NOT do unto others what you would NOT HAVE THEM DO unto you.”

You can meet that requirement by doing nothing to anybody. That is Quaker morality.

There is a world of difference between this Quaker belief and Christianity. My Golden Rule says, “DO unto others what you would have them DO unto you.”

Let me tell you what that means. It means that if I have the POWER to protect the innocent by violence, then I must use violence.

The Quaker morality is Oriental. In traditional Japan, if a person was in danger and you helped him, you were responsible for that person for the rest of his life.

A Westerner who sees someone in danger feels he must ACT to save that person.

Asian morality says that you should always opt out, the way Quakers do.

You should read Bejamin Franklin’s autobiography and see what he says about the cowardly and hypocritical Quakers.

The Philadelphia Quakers were protected from the Indians by the people who went to the mountains, including my own German-speaking ancestors. Once they had a parade to show their dead in Philadelphia to try to get some help in their fight against Indian raiders.

The Quakers just said they were too Christian to help anyone fight to protect them. As long as someone else died to keep the Indians away from them, they were neutrals.

You know that nice Quaker on the Quaker Oats package? That is the picture most Americans have of the “Friends.”

The original Quaker Oats package showed a nasty old man chasing kids with a switch. Quakers were not so peaceful when it came to hitting children. Those were the “Friends,” the Quakers most Americans knew.

Then the Quakers protested and got the sweet, rosy-cheeked old man we were all raised with as the picture of a Quaker.

When Solzhenitzyn was in the Gulag a Quaker woman was visiting. One of the prisoners was told, under threat of death and worse, to say to her, “We are fine, but what about your treatment of American Negroes?”

I remember the Quakers quoting that endlessly. I remember hearing over and over and over that the whole world, even those prisoners in Siberia who were supposedly so maltreated, were appalled by the treatment of American Negroes.

No, I am NOT joking.

Solzhenitsyn, starving in the freezing Siberian Gulag, could not believe that any CHRISTIAN would take the forced words of a starving prisoner as truth about what he was concerned about.

He was right. No Christian would do that.

The Quakers are not Christians, they are Jehovists, orientals.

But the Quakers spread the word: Racism was evil, Stalin was good.

The Quakers are hideous, nasty little people. They are always anti-white. They are always anti-American.

6 Comments