Archive for January, 2006
This is an obvious statement, but I want you to look at it as a Whitakerism.
My IDEAS are invaluable, but too often people look at my concepts, which it took me a lifetime of hard experience and honest mental WORK to come up with, and then they start to expect great things out of a person named Bob Whitaker.
One of the reasons I lost my wonderful team was because they discovered I am not the paragon of virtue they had conjured up in their minds. The biggest reason was exhaustion. I have dealt with this sort of thing before, but I just wasn’t up to dealing with it again.
It was just as well. I desperately needed the rest, and my team could never really realize how exhausted I was.
A Whitakerism: Bob’s IDEAS are invaluable. Bob is just Bob.
Joe gives me some good personal criticism from time to time. After all, Bob’s ideas are going nowhere if Bob himself just lets himself go.
But Joe also gets the spirit of the thing. He found a Whitakerism he really likes, and singled THAT out:
“Our women are our destiny.” Now that’s a powerful statement. I hope everyone is paying very close attention to that statement. Does it sound like a truthful statement to you? It does to me. “Our women are our destiny.” It should be a motto. It should be carved in granite. What could possibly be more true than that statement?
Comment by joe rorke
Bob hands you weapons. You need to grab theones you can use and batter the enemy over the head with them.
Look at the weapons and don’t get too obsessed with Bob.
I told Joe I would do a program on his comment.
I did it. It is called “The Opinion Industry.”
I did it for Stormfront and had a hell of a time reaching Kelso so he would put it on.
I finally reached him, after two days and four tries.
Did you see what I wrote about our age of innocence? The time is rapidly passing when anything I put up gets instant attention.
So this is what I wrote in Stormfront:
I finally reached Kelso.
He told me he was very happy about my program which he will listen to immediately.
And does that bring back memories!
CAL is dealing with so many people he would love to give awards to!
Not that he considers HIMSELF worthy of any awards.
CAL is just so PROUD of people who put themselves out for what he knows is right.
He doesn’t worry about the fact that HE deserves praise. He doesn’t give a damn about it.
Screw praise, our fight is EVERYTHING.
So Kelso was trying to do justice to me and at the same time he was dealing with another situation.
He dealt with the folks who needed dealing with. I was a bit flattered that he understood I didn’t NEED flattering.
Most people will never understand how dedicated people like Kelso are to that we are doing.
I do. And I am very, very proud to say that I am.
Because I did it, too.
And CAL KNOWS that.
Damn! I’m so glad Mark is back!
Yes, Joe, I’m dependent as hell.
“I saw Omega Man a long time ago and was appalled at it as well. ”
“I’ve noticed it’s easier for hollywood to sell a movie with a white male/black female love interest rather than a white female/black male angle. While I’m personally against any black and white mixing, I sometimes think the white male/black female pitch is easier to sell because of the fact that more white males are against mixing white females with negroes than white females are of mixing with negroes. Also, it may have something to do with how back in the days of United States slavery, an occasional slave master would take a black female slave for amorous pleasure. Didn’t Jefferson Davis have a black female love interest at one time?”
Comment by Mark
Another Whitakerism, which means noticing what is so obvious we don’t look at it:
We are all aware that the same father who will get violent if his daughter is seduced by some young guy will be perfectly relaxed when his son “sows some wild oats.”
If this leaves you in a state of incomprehension you need read no further.
Our women are our destiny.
When a white man puts some genes into the black gene pool, it is regrettable. But it is NOT the moral equivalent of white woman bearing a mulatto child.
Everybody knows that. Everybody claims they do NOT know that.
In a piece below, I mentioned an early movie made by the Sci-Fi Channel that has not seenthe light of day since. It had a blond hero madly in love with a black woman.
When I wrote how silly that was, back in those days when the computer world was tiny enough so I got answers, the spokesman for the scifi channel gave me two answers:
1) The black woman was the biggest star they could get and 2) I was the only person who said anything about race.
The bottom line is that 1) they lost a lot of money on that movie and 2) if you are going to launch a new network your first original movie makes a LOT of difference, and this was a BAD mistake.
Black and blond is UGLY. No one is going to tell you so.
Vincent Price made a chiling film in the 1950s called “The Last Man on Earth.” As with so many black-and-white cheap movies in the 1950s, they decided in the 1980s to remake it with a Big Star and in color.
So Charleton Heston starred in “The Omega Man.”
But Charleston Heston, like any other respectable conservative, wanted desperately to prove he was no racist. So the girl in the film was black. Even National Review, this was twenty years ago, referred to her as “his equal opportunity girlfriend.”
The movie disappeared without a trace. It could have been a hit.
But you see, as with the scifi channel, nobody would SAY that people really don’t want to watch a smooch session between a blond and a black.
Everybody says they would like nothing better.
The only problem is that they DON’T. The only problem is the truth.
If you keep threatening people with damnation if they tell you the truth, they won’t tell you the truth.
That’s a Whitakerism.
Allie McBealle was a runaway hit with the yuppies. Then Allie, the blond female lawyer, kept showing she would slurp up black males.
Well, she had to do that. So far, so good. Good, solid patronizing.
But THEN she got INVOLVED with a black lawyer. Her audience raised hell.
Everybody said, like John McCain, “I thought we were BEYOND that.”
Even with yuppies, ugly is still ugly.
So the gentleman black decided he couldn’t have sex with Allie.
I remember the comments on newsgroups: “Allie wouldn’t have a relationship with a black because of class…” and so forth.
Black and blond is UGLY. No one will say that.
Not saying what you see is a costly business.
Which is probably one reason I got paid for saying what no one else would.
As Jeb Clampett, Buddy Ebsen would often say, “PITY.. ful,” Just PITY…ful!”
When I would say that, people owuld think I was repeating the line from “The Beverley Hillbillies.”
Actually, this was an old Southern expression. Buddy Ebsen knew it and used it.
That amazed me. What people seldom know about Buddy Ebsen is that long before he was a star practically his whole life. He was part of a famous dancing duo when Fred Astaire made his first appearance. I believe most people think they know Buddy Ebsen from his appearance in a movie with Shirley Temple.
But he was star long before THAT.
So how in the HELL did he know how Southerners talk?
I think he was Old California and he knew the Okies.
Notice how Lon Chaney, Junior talks in his Wolfman movies. He was the son of silent movie great Lon Chaney. His name was NOT Lon Chaney, Junior, but when the Depression hit, he was a plumber and his business collapsed, so he went into the movies and Lon Chaney, Junior was a draw.
Listen to him talk. He sounds Southern.
By the way, when an actress on The Beverley Hillbillies ran for office, Ebsen used his Jed Clampett voice to denounce her as a runaway liberal.
Harrison Ford is a journeyman carpenter. He was doing carpentry work when he started as an actor.
At the beginning of the Gulag Archipelago, Aleksander Solzhenitsyn desribes how he was arrested when he was an officer onthe Eastern Front:
“Either we had the Germans surrounded or they had us surrounded, depending on how you look at it.”
I remember reading about a New York Jew who went to Alabama with a major star on a Yuppie TV program who played an Ivy League New Yorker.
Suddenly the man transformed right before his eyes. He met his family and started saying, “How y’all doing. How is cousin Fred?” and so forth.
The New York Jew had honestly believed that Deep Southers, aliens, existed only in Hollywood scripts and nightmares. He wrote, “This man is REALLY one of THEM!”
My JOB, meaning what I got PAID for, was to put myself in the place of the other side.
You won’t believe it, but THEY feel surrounded, too.
By the way, Ebsen also once appeared on the cover of the Communist Daily Worker, when he was picketing.
In the time of computers, it is amazing how fast each “age” passes.
I just got through deleting six repetitions of hte article I just wrote to Peter.
Not only does every reader understand exactly what happened, it has happened to him repeatedly:
While the computer grinded away publishing what I had written, I kept hitting the “publish” button. I am willling to bet the same thing has happened to you on e-mail or something else.
Whatever I am doing here is familiar to everybody reading this.
When I look back over some fifteen years that I have been at a computer, age after age has passed.
I remember when I was in a news group and read an entry Bill Gates put in, “a loyal liberal,” he said. The computer world was a good deal smaller then.
At the time the Science Fiction Channel on cable television began, every e-mail I sent them was immediately answered, even one objecting to a program, which has not shown up since, with a white and black mixed couple.
Can you IMAGINE that now?
It was a TINY world.
We are not talking about the last generation. This was ten years ago.
So I am enjoying this time when my readers see some goofup I make and understanding exactly what happened. I am going to miss this cozy world in the Next Generation, up to five years from now.
In reply to the piece below, “Peter is Understanidng Wordism” Peter says,
“Granted that we all will respect your wishes, I don’t buy it.”
“When I mentioned citing you chapter and verse, I put a little winky face next to it, so you knew it was a joke.”
“Summarizing some of your pithiest statements in one place would simply do what your archives do, but would be a lot easier to access. If that were wordist, then so would be everything you write.”
“If the real reason is that it would take a lot of work, I understand. Even if a volunteer here offered to comb through the archive for you, you would still want to go over what they did. And even if there be things that are tucked away in an article we skipped over, your blog is here.”
“If the real reason is modesty, I understand.”
“If the real reason is something you have not mentioned, I think we would respect your wishes.”
“In any case, you must realize that this is not an attempt to put anything upon you; it is a compliment. ”
Comment by Peter
I would be highly complimented if someone decided to do what you are talking about. I think my arguments are critical and it would be great if we did have a little book of htem the way you say.
The reason I didn’t write this was because I got sidetracked on your making the critical distinction between ***A*** Whitakerism and Whitakerism.
It would not be worth your trouble because no one would PUBLISH this book, if you are thinking in those terms. My publishability is long gone.
But publication is no longer the way one gets ideas out today.
I am a tired old man. You and Joe shouldn’t fault me for writing what hits my mind and missing so much.
A British group asked me about using my programs on its i-bot(?) program. I said what I always say: “Use them freely and with my blessings.”
Spread the word! I’ll help.
My wishes are NOT that no one put my stuff down in usable order. Nothing would please me more, and I would help.
I just got sidetracked on your clear demarkation of Wordism and teaching. I have tried very hard to get that across, and when you get it, it’s important to me.
Joe is experiencing our usual difficulty.
I keep misinterpreting what he is saying and he thinks I CAN’T be that dumb.
Joe, old buddy, you underestimate me. I spent many years in academia. I am capable of depths of stupidity that would leave you in awe.
Often something I see in your writings relates to a general point I want to address. Please, Joe, I can only spend so much space on disclaimers without boring the other readers.
I said up front that it would be both tiresome and untrue to accuse you of getting your ideas from Ayn Rand. Then I went on to talk about THEM.
Your replies are here, in full, in comments.
I quote you about my manipulating people below.
But I do NOT disagree. If one is trying to get others to followone’s way of thinking, it can be called teaching or manipulation.
In fact, I am the one who keeps bitching about the education establishment manipulating people and calling it education, so I can’t really claim exemption from the same rule.
To the enemy, my educationis his manipulation. To enemy genuinely belives that their Righteous Resentment is not simple hatred. I try not to fool myself.
I make the reservations when I discuss the things that what you say make me think of. Nobody thinks you are an Objectivist or any other kind of Wordist.
What you say is here TWICE, once in your original comment, which I quote IN FULL, and in any reply you wish to make. If, after all that, anybody, including me, still doesn’t understand your point, it’s not your concern.
The only reason this could worry you is if you are worried about how you look to people who simply can’t quite get what you’re saying. I doubt seriously whether that keeps you awake at night.
Joe, there are damned few people onthis planet who are worth talking with. You are one and I am another. So, as you say, we’re having fun, so stop worrying about Bob’s bumbling.
The last sentence of Peter’s comment is the critical one:
When you are going to list all the Whitakerisms out?
Just put them in a post like this, archive it, and put a link to it in the sidebar.
The first four would be the Drumbeat about multiculturalism is a code word for White genocide, et al., that you have on your front page.
Then you would list the others down in order from most important to least.
Somewhere in there would be this:
72) There are two things EVERY forensic pathologist has to do to keep his job:
A) Be able to tell the race of a murder victim from a few dessicated remains and
B) Declare publically that race does not exist.
When you come up with another, you place it in the list. From time to you can refer to it, like please see the Book of Bob, verse 72 b and we would all know what to do.
Or would that be wordist?
Comment by Peter
You GOT it!
A list of Whitakerisms amounts to a Book of Whitaker.
I don’t keep track of Whitakerisms because they are a WAY of thinking.
Joe said of one of my writings,
“I notice this piece indicates a great deal of dependency. Also, attempts to manipulate people. Come to think of it, isn’t that what politicians do? ”
He is dead right. I am trying to manipulate you, not JUST into quoting me, that is done by a lot of people who don’t know they’re doing it, but into thinking in terms of “Peterisms.”
As I said below, I want you to listen to someone saying race doesn’t exist and THINK about hwat they are saying.
Obviously, and that is the word, obviously, what they are saying reflects an attitude toward non-whites. If Simmons had thought out his observation carefully, he would realize that this “race does not exist” business represents an attitude toward non-whites that is so patronizing it would a SLAVEHOLDER blush.
If I manipulate you correctly, I am going to hear an endless stream of Peterisms and Joeisms and Shariisms and Simmmonsisms.
Whitakerisms fall out in the course of my writings. I don’t keep track of them individually. They are VERY useful arguments to USE. But behind them is a WAY of THINKING that WORKS.
I want to manipulate you into thinking that way.
There will be no Book of Whitaker.
Referring to Wordists who insist that all the world will be fine if we multiracially follow their Book, Simmons says:
“Its because the white PCers think everyone is white, and it only need be brought out with properly applied Marxism.”
To paraphrase what is said of fat people, “Inside every colored man is a white man trying to get out.”
Once again, a Whitakerism:
Please note that the Australian program is trying to prove what colored people want proven: taht there is NO difference between a white man and a colored man.
As CS Lewis said, no one shouts equality if they think THEY are equal. So the “no difference” crowd is assuming, correctly, that non-whitesare willing to fight for hte proposition that any difference between white and non-white willl reflect badly on the non-whites.
The ideal is white, and they are arguing they are white.
Which leads to another Whitakerism:
Blacks are the most white supremacist people on earth.
“Interestingly they are now running a TV series here in Australia which purports to prove there is no such thing as “race” and they try to show this by using latest DNA research.”
That is the standard line. Let me deal with it, as usual, with a Whitakerism:
There are thousands of professional forensic pathologists.
There are two things EVERY forensic pathologist has to do to keep his job:
1) Be able to tell the race of a murder victim from a few dessicated remains and
2) Declare publically that race does not exist.
Tongue firmly in cheeck, Joe wrote the following:
Could it be that there is a conspiracy to not look at a Whitakerism? If a Whitakerism is so overwhelmingly frightening to those who dare not look at it or those who would hide it from others, could there be an ongoing conspiracy to suppress all the Whitakerisms that could possibly come to light? Why would anyone want to bury any Whitakerism? More especially, if Whitakerisms are potentially helpful to mankind in a world-shattering sort of way, what sort of diabolical entity would organize to bury the entire bag of Whitakerisms? Whitakerisms are either good or not good. If they are good, only badness could oppose them. That’s the way it is. That’s the law of the West. There is no neutral ground. Whitakerisms are either good or not good. What do you think, world? Anybody got any questions? Make them to the point.
Comment by joe rorke
I am going to do a program on this point.
As usual, the answer to this question is a Whitakerism:
The reason no one looks at Whitakerisms is because those who control opinion make a LIVING at it. How long do you think the libeal or respectable conservative commendtator would last if he had to face a few Whitakerisms?
Look at O’Reilly’s constant revelations about left-wing academia. He keeps saying he can’t understand it. What if he simply faced the fact that social science IS leftism, that what we call “nurture” is exactly what social scientists SELL for a living?
O’Reilly seldom says anything a Whitakerism wouldn’t explain. It would be a little hard on him if he announced the Whitakerism and said, “Well, that kills my hour program this time.”
As I have said so often, how long would the average liberal-respectable conservative “both sides” dialogue last if conservatives laughed at liberal inanities?
What if, inthe midst of an earnest talk show, someone said to a Liberal Intellectual, “Look, the last fourteen proposals you made were disasters. Why should we listen to THIS one?
Remember, this “both sides” crap is a major INDUSTRY.
Reply on Stormfront:
You said, “On the ethnics(you should say “coloreds”), they will follow our race wherever it goes.”
That is why I told rednecks8ofmind he didn’t get my point. My point here is VERY specific.
Coloreds follow WHITE SKINNED PEOPLE.
Let me repeat that:
Coloreds follow WHITE SKINNED PEOPLE.
Here “ethnics” means the non-Anglo-Saxon whites.
The Big Lie is that SKIN COLOR does not matter.
Everybody, even racists, want to emphasize that they are not obsessed with SKIN COLOR.
I want to emphasize that I AM obsessed with skin color. This isthe ultimate undermining of everything they intimidate everybody, inclduing scientific racists, with.
Meanwhile, back on earth, where do the non-whites go?
To white-SKINNED countries.
Not to IQ countries.
Not to Culturally Aware countries.
Not to religiously correct countries.
On the real planet earth, the wetbacks are ALWAYS swimming towards WHITE SKIN.
I do not start with an attempt to be sophisticated. I begin with REALITY.
The REALITY is not IQ test. The REALITY is not the proper interpretation of religious doctrine.
The REALITY is SKIN COLOR.
I do not have to explain WHY this is true. It is TRUE.
I don’t care if it sounds simplistic. The only thing that matters to me is that it is true.
I would not want to be born into a world that has brown skin. Nobody seems to want to REMAIN in a country with dark skin.
So let us state the Ultimate Heresy:
It is ALL a matter of skin color. The Golden Rule does not ask for a scientific explanation. The Golden Rule says t hat if people without a white skin produce societies people want to escape from, then it is a matter of SKIN COLOR.
A Whitakerism consists of examning facts that are so overwhelmingly obvious that we never really look at them.
This is a Whitakerism.
Joe said he is not a preacher or a teacher because he does not want to manipulate people, and he reminded me to be aware of that pitfall.
Then I talked about Objectivists calling me a “thug.”
But there is a giant, chasmic difference here, THE difference.
Joe was expressing HIS OPINION.
Joe’s says that IN HIS OPINION, what I am advocating is manipulative. In JOE’s OPINION, he can only avoid being manipulative by taking the position he takes.
When Objectivists used the word “thug” or liberals and respectable cosnervatives use words like “racist” or “anaziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews,” they are trying to SCARE ME OFF by using a label.
Hell will be skating rink before Joe is scared off by a label. Hell will be equally frigid before Joe expects ME to be frightened by a label.
When Joe uses a label, he is expressing an opinion. When others use a label they are using a weapon.
In short, when someone uses a label in the ordinary way they are being manipulative.
Joe has a point. Others are trying to bully.
There is a hilarious very short program at
I recommended it on Stormfront. Then I added this comment:
The funny program is true, but incomplete. It ends with the coloreds taking over Britain, the Britons getting on a boat going west, and Britain sinking.
So far, so good, and complete from a BRITISH point of view.
But what happens next? The island of Britain becomes third world, so what are the third worlers going to do next?
Immigrate, of course.
People are always talking about the American southwest is going to become Hispanic and go into the sewers with the lands they came from.
We need, as Paul Harvey says, to tell the REST of the story.
When wetcbacks have turned the land across the Rio Grande into a copy of what is south of the Rio Grande now, what will happen?
Obviously , the wetbacks will come across the Mississippi to get out of the world they created.
This is WHITE flight, not British flight or Southwest flight. Until the British learn to continue the story beyond Britain, until Americans learn to pursue the story beyond illegal immigration, the story will not be told.
Until we go on to the REST of the story we will be bitching about the American government’s immigration policy and the British government’s immigration policies.
The problem is not national, it is RACIAL. Until we talk about it that way we are not FACING it.