Archive for April, 2006
Hinduism is the only major religion left that does not worship some form of Jehovah.
Hinduism is an ancient Aryan religion. Its aim is to escape from The Wheel of Life.
Hinduism is therefore dedicated to the proposition, “Is life worth living?”
And the REAL answer it gives to that question is called “The Wheel of Life.”
You hear all the time that Hunduism talks about reincarnation.
Being born again and again is hte CURSE both Hinduism and Buddhism seek ESCAPE from.
But Hindue reincarnation is not a RELIGIOUS concept. The ancient Aryans ASSUMED that human consciousness and the human body and brain were different.
Hindues do not BELIEVE that the soul is separate from the body. They ASSUME that the body and the soul are two different things. So when the body dies, they don’t BELIEVE that soul goes elsewhere. Their only question is WHERE it goes.
I do not know single Westerner who calls himself a Hindu or a Buddhist who can understand this.
So all of them are merely foolish, silly.
Meanwhile an actual Hindu or Buddhist talks about the Wheel of Life. That is eom no Westerner who thinks he is a menber of their faith talks about.
To the real Hindus and the real Buddha, Reincarnation is a curse. In desribing a false idea, Gautama Buddha said, “This leads to rebirth.”
But a Western “Buddhist” would say that “being bron again” is GOOD, right?
Right. Because he is SILLY.
The whole point of Hinduism and Buddhism is to ESACPE from the Wheel of Life.
If you ignore the Wheel of Life you are exactly like “Christian” who ignores Heaven and Hell.
Buddha had eyes the color of the lotus, blue. A thousand years later the Indian who brought Kung-Fu to India was said to bore a hole through a wall with his BLUE eyes.
The original name of the caste system was naryu. which in Sanskrit is “color.”
It takes LOT of crap to cover the obvious meaning of all that.
But Buddha fought the caste system which had kept his race white. He said if you talked the right words, you would escape from the Wheel of Life.
And Zoroaster, not that long after the Indian Aryans seprate from the Persians, told Persian Iranians that the God of This Word, Ahr5iman, was evil, and the god ofhte next, Ahura-Mazda, was good.
Which obviously at least obviously to ME, led to suicidal ideas.
Because the simple fact is that unless you make things better, life IS a curse.
Non-Aryans avoid this problem by not asking the question.
One way to dealt with this Aryan inquiry is hide behind Jehovah and say, “It is a mortal sin to say that life is a curse.”
If you “assimilate” in the South American way, you end up with brown people who nefver ask that question again.
These brown people build a “Civilization” which eventually calls and another “Civilization” grows and then it falls. Like any other anthill, it waxes and it wanes.
That is what the non-Aryan calls “life.”
To be Aryan is to be able to reach the stars and beyond. But it cannot be done with what we call Idealism.
Give us a few tens of thousands of Aryans living in space and we will make life a wonderful thing.
You will remain an anthill here on earth.
A BIG anthill.
Am IDEALISTIC anthill.
A free, Libertarian anthill.
And there will be Communist anthills, glorious in their adherence to the Prophet Marx.
The only problem will be that your life will be more pain than joy.
And it will go nowhere.
But you will explain that it is all going somewhere, because we do not understand the depth of your thought.
You can have the depth of your thought, your detailed dedication to your particular form of Wordism.
All I ask is a few thousand Aryans for the stars.
Let my people GO:
” Liberals and respectable cosnervatives say there is this RACE problem. Everybody says this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours into EVERY white country and ONLY into white countries.”
“The Netherlands and Belgium are more crowded than Japan or Taiwan, but nobody says Japan or Taiwan will solve this RACE problem by bringing in millions of third worlders and quote assimilating unquote with them.”
“Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY white country and ONLY white countries to “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites.”
“What if I said there was this RACE problem and this RACE problem would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were brought into EVERY black country and ONLY into black countries?”
“How long would it take anyone to realize I’m not talking about a RACE problem. I am talking about the final solution to the BLACK problem?”
“And how long would it take any sane black man to notice this and what kind of psycho black man wouldn’t object to this?”
“But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against my race, the white race, Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that I am a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.”
They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white.
“Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.”
Let me repeat: In order to get what you need out of this Blog, you have to READ THE COMMENTS.
Crosstalk is now developing, but it is the kind of crosstalk intelligent people with common sense know how to engage in.
That sounds easy, doesn’t it?
It’s simple but it is NOT easy.
Our experienced commenters disagree with me and with each other. But they express what they have to say clearly.
I have not gone against those who disagree with me most of the time because what they give me is a POINT.
It would be pitiful if a man got to be my age and didn’t know that he COULD be just plain WRONG.
Thee is only one kind of disagreement I hate, and that is the standard crap some anti learned from Mommy Professor.
For some odd reason the people who stick with this Blog never talk like Mommy Professor.
My commenters give me the freedom I have begged for. If I miss something, they fill it in. If there is a point to go ahead from, they go ahead with it.
I make brave, flat statements. The reason they are brave is because I risk making a fool of myself.
If I do, my commenters point it out.
If we keep this up we are going to develop a well-rounded seminar.
We will be unique. In grad school a real seminar is a thing of the past. We may be reawakening the dead here.
But the bottom line is that you cannot get the lessons of Bob’s Seminar unless you read the COMMENTS.
A few decades ago almost nobody knew what karate was. But two decades ago my nephew took it in school.
But away back then, if anyone had heard of karate, it was what we called “the grunt and groan school.”* This was the form of show karate where a person would put several bricks on two boards and then break through them with his hand.
Us real shrewd guys knew all the ins and outs, so we saw that there were several problems with using grunt and groan karate as a fighting tool.
One technical difficulty of grunt and groan karate, for example, was persuading one’s enemy to put his head down between two boards in the proper position.
I was in an unarmed combat class as part of my Intelligence work. After class the instructor and an advanced student were talking about grunt and groan karate. I had a joke I had been dying to make.
In case you think I have always acted intelligently, please remember that I couldn’t resist making a smartass remark to two guys who were both experts at killing people with their bare hands.
I said, “I know you start with small planks and move on to breaking bricks, but what do you break in the very first classes?”
The instructor naturally said that you have to learn the technique first, so you don’t break things in the early classes.
I replied, “Hell, I must have been especially talented. In my very first class” I pointed to the side of my hand, “I broke this and this and…”
They both laughed.
But I also noticed they were looking me over very cloesly.
I got the distinct impression that they were deciding, in case I didn’t shut up, which of my “vital pressure points” they were going to take out first.
I have read hundreds of statements from antis in Stormfront.
Not once has any anti every said that he learned anything here.
This is especially interesing because one of the main tenets of Political Correctness is that every group except white gentiles has something to teach us.
Every documentary about stone age men living today always says, “They are thought of as primitive, but they are enormously sophisticated.” They always have much to teach us.
In fact, even those Hottentots in Namibia who don’t even have stones have much to teach us.
Nor is this universal ability to teach us limited to people.
Every animal, like every Native American, is said to “live with nature, not against it” as we should.
Every documentary on man or beast says that they have much to teach us.
So the only animal on earth who has nothing to teach Politicially Correct people are white gentiles.
There is a reason for this.
For today’s leftist or rightist anti-racist, the Finasl Truth is fully told in the Books of Political Correctness, as expounded on by Mommy Professor. Only heretics do not look upon someone like Karl Marx or Ayn Rand as the Ultimate Prophets, so we are purely destructive.
This is a very, very old attitude.
It was best expressed by a Moslem when Persia was conquered by Islam. The words he said were said earlier, with an absolutely eerie exactness, by Christians when they burned the runes, heiroglyphic documents, Amerind writings, and anything else they could get their hands on where they took over.
After Islam conquered Persia the question was what to do with two thousand years of writings the Moslems found in Persia from the long age of the Zoroastrian religion.
The Moslem wise man said, “Many of these writings contradict the Koran, so they should be destroyed. Many of them confirm the Truths of the Koran, but we do not need them because we have the Koran Itself.”
So they burned them.
So the answer Political Correctness has to heresy is the same as every other religion. Heretics can either speak Lies and Hate, or they can merely confirm the Politically Correct Truth that our Priest-Professors have already given us.
Either way, an anti can learn nothing from us.
Political Correctness is not LIKE a religion.
Political Correctness IS a religion.
I have several things I have been putting off writing becuase they are hard work.
I go ready to answer a libertarian anti-racist on Stormfront and I can’t reach Stormfront. If I don’t get started now I won’t get started.
I have to go over the same stuff again,and theat is tiring.
This is repetititon,but many of you have not heard it, and most readers will get tired of me repeating things but they willl forget it when the point comes up.
That’s normal. None of us remembers all we have, which is a major reason I’m here.
So the refresher won’t hurt.
So I’ll put the answer here and put it there in the “From Bob’s Blog” category.
An anti-racist libertarian believes in magic.
Their mantra is that the world will be fine when there is “free movement of capital, goods, services, AND LABOR” in international trade.
In practical terms what this means is that when a Mexican crosses a magic line in the middle of the Rio Grande, his imcome miraculously increses ten-fold.
The official platform of the Libertarian Part says this tenfold increase in income is a free lunch. The only reason it happens is because that “labor” gets inside a magical line. If you keep them south of this magic line, you are stealing all that money from them.
No liberatarian EVER asks WHY that Mexican gets ten times as much money north ofhtat line as south of it.
I repeat, the official line is that that line is magic.
In the real world, there is a REASON for things.
In the real world there is no free lunch.
The reason a Mexican gets ten times as much here is because he is crossing a line from a country controlled by Mexicans to a country controlled by Americans.
Thew problem is, of course, that this magic line is ALWAYS a racial thing. When colored people cross hte magic line into countries controlled by whites, their incomes instantly increases exponentially.
So you just call anybody who says the line is not magic a racist. No libertarian is capable of thinking of htis point becuase his mind isblocked against anything that has obvious racial implications.
So the line is that if all the Mexicans moved here, and we all moved to Mexico, the United States would be just as rich as it is now as long as we kept the Constitution and books about libertarianism.
Japan has less resources than Mexico does, and they just copied out methods. Like Japan, we would soon have an American standard of living again. If only whites moved south of the magic line and left all the dark-colored people here with our new Mexican population, the line would become magical in the southward direction.
In the twentieth century, only the Communists accomplished the miracle of keeping white countries poor.
Libertarians have a way to MAKE them poor.
It’s called “the free movement of capital, goods, services AND LABOR.”
Libertarian Wordism and Marxist Wordism, who say that some philosophy of govermment is going to make all the difference and race none, are equally ridiculous and equally destructive.
I went through a whole process, running through Zoroastrianism, to come to an entirely different conclusion from the one I started with.
The reason that I am sure of my beliefs is because when I give something a lot of thought I keep coming back to a new example of what I insist upon.
So I started off saying that Christianity’s illnesses today come from its basis in the Semitic Old Testament.
But during my boring trip through Zoroastrianism I came to the conclusion that, in fact, the basic illness of Christian doctrine also explains what people keep asking me about:
Does the Aryan race have a deep, suicidal thread in it?
If we know what that thread is, we can do something about it.
And here is the answer:
Animals and other races do not question whether life is worth living.
The result is that we keep producing religions that degenerate into genetic suicide.
Please notice that my endlessly long pieces on Zoroastrianism finally up being the three sentences above.
That is why I take my own short statements so seriously. It is hard you to appreciate now many hours of hard thought it took me to get to them.
Many of you objected when you were brought through my long digressions into Zoroastrianism with me. I’ve been doing that sort of thing all my life. It involves hard work and bredom for me, too.
So if I keep hammering in my short conclusions, please try to remember what that nail cost me.
Actually, this is mine now.
“Property is theft” you know.
I stole it, so it’s MINE:
White Guilt – Legal attempt at suicide.
Revolutionary – Someone who wants to maintain the status quo.
Rebellious – Choosing NOT to be a progressive.
Open Minded – Having blindly adopted liberalism
Tolerant – Being tolerant of your own racial demise.
Diversity – The belief that a broad range of opinions can only come about when you have people with a broad range of ’skin colours’
Racist – Someone who acutally points out that if you bring together people with a broad range ’skin colour’ you will have a differences of opinions.
Race – See ’skin colour’
America is a nation of immigrants.
So the reason I have a right to be here is not because ten generations of my family have been here, but because I can claim that I am an American because my ancestors were immigrants.
It follows that a first-generation immigrant has more right to be here than I do.
But the term “Native American” is based onthe official doctrine that that groups’ ancestors were NOT immigrants.
What in the HELL are they doing in a Nation of Immigrants?
Send them back to Siberia where they came from!
Jared Taylor said at the AR Conference that he was a liberal until he realized a simple fact:
The answer to “Can’t we all along together?” is
I LOVE short, straight statements like that.
I would like some American Renaissance member to judge whether this Bob’s Blog entry is a pretty good summary of AR’s view:
— Immigration Law IS Discrimination
President Carter’s head of the INS stated flatly that, is it were up to her, she would let everybody intot he United States without restrictions.
Remember that this was in the late 1970s, when Pat Buchanan was saying that Americans died in World War II specifically to open Europe up to third world immigration, Joe Sobran was pro-immigration, and the official conservative doctrine was “free movement of good, services, and LABOR.”
What if somebody were being appointed to the Civil Rights Commmission and said that, as far as they were concerned, slavery was OK.
Do you think anybody would mention it?
They would say, as they have said in hearing after hearing, “You can’t enforce civil rights law if you don’t really BELIEVE in it.”
Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that, to be a true American, you must believe that we are a nation of immigrants.
Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that a true American agrees that all mankind is ONE.
In fact, the official doctrine is that we are ” a nation founded on the principle that all men are created equal.” That’s the PURPOSE of America.
Immigration law is founded onthe idea that WE have a right a right to be here and THEY don’t.
Immigration law is founded on the principle that there IS a “we” and a “they.”
So how can Real Americans and all the Little Americans in Europe who insist on the same ideas of “democracy” America does turn around and keep “them” out?
From the Wordist point of view, the “undocumented workers” marching to demand that all of Mexicobe allowed into the United States are true Americans.
All who oppose them are NOT true Americans.
We don’t BELONG here.
Remember, from the liberal and respectable conservatives’ REQUIRED view of what constitutes an American, there IS no “us” and “them.”
You cannot argue for immigration restrictions and at the same time be a “real American” from the Wordist point of view. According to liberals and respectable conservatives you are unAmerican if you do not believe that an American is somebody who sincerely believes that this nation is dedicated to the proposition that all men are created, that all men are ONE.
Immigration law is based on the Preamble to the United States Constitution: “We the people of the United States and OUR posterity.”
In July of 1863 Abraham Lincoln changed that preamble and substitute the preamble to the Declaration for it: “All men are created equal.”
For Lincoln, tha is what the Civil War was about: “We are now engaged in a great civil war to test whether a nation so dedicated can long endure.”
National Review practically has a hernia insisting that it is Lincoln Magazine. Liberals swear by Lincoln’s words.
Then NR expressses outrage and puzzlement that US immigration law is not enforced.
In Lincoln’s day, there were no immigration laws. In the Gettysburg Address, he tacitly promised there never WOULD be.
How in the HELL can Big America and all the Little America’s who insist they are just as multiracial enforce immigration laws?
Immigration law requires an “us” and a “them.”
There will be no “us” and “them” until we learn to DISCRIMINATE again.
I’m just going to steal what Tim said and ask for comments on it.
I will have a couple on it myself.
“UNA. “Born again?”
MONOS. Yes, fairest and best beloved Una, “born again.” These were the words upon whose mystical meaning I had so long pondered, rejecting the explanations of the priesthood, until Death itself resolved for me the secret.”
I rarely venture into religion on this blog. Once I realized our race is our religion it became pointless for me to post on what I viewed as redundant topics. I realize that these religious topics are nevertheless important to hammer through BW points to newcomers here. As well as to pound Christians who cannot get it through their thick heads that they do not have to love brown people to achieve salvation. But today I am going to take a stab at this and post about Christianity.
The quote above is something most readers will have read in their childhood. It is from Edgar Allen Poe’s The Colloquy of Monos and Una. I read it the other day by accident. I got to thinking about the concept ‘Born Again’. This concept has perplexed many people and has been argued time and time again. Baptist have one view. Catholics and Lutherans have other views on this–and so on, so forth etc. But what if “born again” is not a religious concept at all?
We know that the New Testament is a radical departure from the Old Testament. We know the New Testament is NOT Jewish. BW has enlightened us time and time again with the obvious Zoroastrian themes presented in the New Testament. We know that Zoroastrianism was an Aryan racial religion. We know the Aryan religion was the dominate religion of Persia. We also know that “Semites don’t invent”. So where did Christ grab the concept of ‘born again’. Simply put —to be ‘born again’ is not a religious concept but a racial concept rapped in a religious package.
The concept of ‘born again’ is another Aryan concept. We all know you can be be an Asian with just an Asian momma or even just an Asian father. The whole planet knows if one of your parents is African —–you are BLACK. However, whites are the exception to this rule. You cannot be white with just a white mother. You cannot be white with just a white father. To be Aryan, your mother and father must both be White. Of course, you are saying that is silly Tim—everyone on earth KNOWS THAT. Yes and so did Christ. The Hindus referred to this as born twice. Your first birth was to the mother. The second birth was to the father.
One birth to an Aryan mother did not make you an Aryan. You had to be born the second time unto the father. You had to be born twice. Or as Christ said:”Ye must be born again”. Every other sentence out of Christs mouth was “I think thee father” “I think thee father”. This of course is Christ showing a constant state of gratitude to his father. But gratitude for what?? This is also a constant Aryan theme. Only through the father can you be born again or born the second time to make you an Aryan. Whether in Persia or India. They had two different takes on the same theme –”keep us white”! Just like our theme right this minute in America! “keep us white”.
Christ went on and on with these themes of ‘born again’. He said it was only through the father. “Not by works or deeds lest any man should boast”. Go back in time and ask Buddha if you could be a Brahmin by works or deeds! The Hindus may make light of it now. The Zoroastrians may say they are just a ‘tribal’ religion now. But any white man that reads there actual texts knows better. Jews did not come from JU-piter. They have been on earth for quite a while. There education establishments in Rome were teaching a lot more than just Judaism. This is well known. They were learning everything about everybody. Christ did not grab these concepts from thin air. He grabbed them from Aryan religions and his non Jewish Zoroastrianism buddies. There is nothing new in the New Testament.
I have heard many smart racialist say that we need a Racial religion. We already have a Racial Religion. In fact, we have so many of them that we do NOT need another one. What we need to do is recognize it. Am I saying we should all make the New Testament into a Racial Religion. No. I am saying it is already a racial religion and like all Aryan Religions it has gone astray. Like I posted before –now that Jesus does not have blond hair and blue eyes White folks have no interest in him. Christianity is resigned to the third world like all other Aryan religions before it. The key idea is that Aryans are already born again. You can Universalize Christianity. But you cannot Universalize being White. The Davinci Code is doing a good job of getting people to questioning Christianity. I used to say we should leave Christianity alone. I know have changed my mind. We should keep taking it apart so Aryans can understand it before it completely kills us.
Comment by Tim — 4/27/2006 @ 11:07 pm | Edit This
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Joe Odin took a look at my Partisan Dictionary and ADDED to it.
After all, all the Partisan Dictionary was was an addition to Ambros Briece’s Devl’s Dictionary.
More generally, joe odin did what I most desire my commenters to do: He started where I left off and went ahead.
I want you to use use thsoe of my insights you consider right as a basis to go on from, not as a guiding philosophy to just stick with.
I need you to repeat my points to others, and to expand on them yourselves.
Here is Joe’s CONTRIBUTION:
May I try:
Ignorant – Thinking outside the groupthinktank.
naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews – see above
Outsourcing – customer disservice
Radicals – reactionaries
SUVs – dinosaur killers
Comment by joe odin
I just read another wail about the poor widdah injuns from an anti.
Antis know no history.
I don’t care WHERE you’re from, your ancestors came in and took the land from somebody else. You think slavery only existed in the American South and that only Americans ever came from somewhere else.
If someone recieves stolen goods, he doesn’t sit around and whine about it.
If he really thinks the goods are stolen, he gives them back.
If you live in a country you think was stolen, you LEAVE.
Cut the crap and get out or shut up your whining.
If you don’t LIKE your country, you still have a right to live in it.
But if you really believe your country is STOLEN, that is entirely different. You do not have a right to keep stoen property for an instant.
And every country was stolen from the natives if America was stolen from the Indians.
So shut up or get out.
In the Stormfront the discussion naturally got around to how owmen today are supposed to be terribly upset is some men like big breasts.
Not just if we are offenseive about it, but we are supposed to believe in our hearts that they aren’t there or we are “objectivizing women.
This led me, as usual, to a mre general point:
I am 65, and I got my sexual imprinting in the 1950s. So I like big breasts.
Women did not consider it insulting for a man to notice she had them.
In the 1940s pinups, legs were emphasized.
By the time you get my age, unless you are hypnotized by Poltiical Correctness, you get a laugh out of how Modern Opinion is a repeat a past Modern Opinion fad.
In the 1920s women tried to have the “flat look,” trying to look like boys from the waist up.
This was because until then women had worn long dresses and emphasized their upper torsos. So the Liberated Woman of hte 1920s had a short skirt and flattened breasts.
Now women wear clothes designed to make them as indistinguishable from boys as possible.
They are reacting against a reaction, which makes them just like the reaction before.
And therefore very, very Modern.
In the South of hte 1950s and before, we routinely referred to a woman we did not know was maried or not as “Miz.” Other parts of hte country considered that quaint, so they carefully used Miss and Mrs.
But Women’s Liberation, the Ultra-Modern view, insists on Miz.
I get a kick out of this nonsense.
Aristocaqrcy — naciocracy
Professional — A title which entitles one to get paid without producing anything
Consultant — See “Professional”
American — Somebody who is part of a nation of immigrant, i.e., everybody and therefore
Constitution — The Supreme Court of the United States
Modern — Becoming dated
Knowledge — See “Law”
Wisdom — Drivel which is taken seriously
Equality: Bad arithmetic.
Moderation: the idea that truth is the average between two absurdities.
Hate: Righteous Indignation on the other side.
Law — Opinion with teeth
Brotherhood — See “Cain”
Fascism — “One man, one vote” where the man is specified