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
Do you think that testable IQ has been skewed by the feminization of education? I remember being one of those “smart” little girls who learned to read quickly, was good at memorizing,etc. But after I grew up, I found out that I actually wasn’t very good at figuring things out. I’m impressed with Peter’s psychology professer doing what she did.
Comment by Shari
I warned you that what you will get for your comments is not necessarily a reply to what you said.
You will get what you made me think of.
I also said that that is what I want from you.
What Shari made me think of was request from my sister, the one who actually reads this blog from time to time.
She wanted me to record here the regular piece I wrote for The Southern Patrisan for so long, “The Partisan Dictionary.” It was an Ambrose Bierce type of definition, which uses definitions to make a point.
Bierce, from Texas, called ie “The Devil’s Dictionary.”
For example, he defined the word “mulatto:”
“Mulatto — n — A child of two races, ashamed of both.”
So when Shari used the word “feminization, it reminded me of a definition I used in the Partisan Dictionary:
“Feminism — n — a movement dedicated to the diea that being feminine is a sign of inferiority.”
Shari makes it clear that she is a female. She makes it very clear that a more male approach is necessary in leading a white society to the stars.
But aren’t all women just like men?
That is what feminism is all about: women can do everything men can.
I have read astonisahed articles written by the few feminists who actuallly had children. They tell us, breathlessly, that by the age of eighteen months the girl child is DIFFERENT from the boy child.
They discover that, after a few hundred million years of evolution, the girls’ function and the boys’ function is actually DIFFERENT.
Girls are not people who, given the proper upbringing, would be boys.
Once again I am in the peculiar position of explaining to you something you will not believe about the ruling attitude I remember just a short time ago. Like all those outdated attitudes, it is required on campuses today.
But on planet earth, the idea that boys and girls are the same is laughed.
You brats simply cannot believe that this idea was required belief for most of my lifetime.
Women PICK the leaders. In every part of nature, it is the females who decide whom they will mate with. Male peacocks do all the strutting. Female peacocks are the POINT of all the strutting.
Feminism says that what is important is the strutting. Femals don’t get the big colored fantails male peacocks get.
This causes the female peacocks irreversible ego damage.
You think I am joking, of course. You didn;t live through decades of this orthodoxy.
So Shari uses the term “feminization” as derogatory.
How one earth could a WOMAN use “feminization” in a derogatory sense?
She uses it because that particular feminization is in the wrong PLACE.
There are places where being feminine is absolutely essential.
That’s not rocket science.
There are places where being maculine is absolutely essential or evolution would have produced no males at all.
In fact, since females do all the judging and raise all the offspring, it is a bit of a relief for us males to realize that we DO have a place.
None of which answers the point Shari made.
But I think she will find it a relief that somebody else understands where she is coming from.
Living in a world where nobody seems to understand the basics is no easier on Shari thanit is on me.
Her basic point is right.
I wish I had been able to address it at length, Shari. But because we live in a world where the difference between men and women is a mystery, it is hard to get down to other essentials.
Peter points out:
Do you really think that even the “testable IQs” that are marketed today are valid measures by race?
Do you really think that a psychologist who discovered that Orientals or Jews had much lower IQs than whites would be given much press?
In college, I had a Psych professor who did tell the truth — quietly. She found real, valid test results and displayed them on an overhead in class. She put the results up as just one display in a series of overheads. It was part of a group of overheads that she said we didn’t need to take notes on if we didn’t want to, that they wouldn’t be on the test, and that they were just for our own information. She had done this previously with more innocuous overheads, so we were familiar with the routine. She left up the overhead of the test results showing lower IQs for Orientals and Jews only briefly. But she did scan the class to see who had noticed. I did.
I stayed after class and told her thanks for the overheads, smiled and left. She got great evals from the class. I got a good grade.
Comment by Peter
That lady is part of our underground army, each member of whom works alone.
You were a blessing to her.
In any totalitarian environment, there are those of us who keep telling the truth, defying the Truth.
I cannot give you enough credit for understanding. I cannot give you enough credit for what you did for that lonely shieldmaiden whom I wod love to thank.
I get SO tried of people praising somebody who makes a publc statement which is something like the truth.
The heroes and the herioines are the underground warriors like her.
We fight for what is true simply because we cannot stand untruth.
That is heroism.
When you understand that, everybody else seems superficial and silly to you.
Joe Rorke, whom I discussed in the last article, has not only come back despite my twisting his words, but, as a fellow old-timer, he just gave me an invaluable compliment:
“Bob, I swear I think you are getting better by the minute. Here I thought you were devolving and it turns out you are evolving. Not bad for an old timer. ”
Comment by joe rorke
Modesty woud be the decent response, but it’s not in me.
The killing thing about age is that it leaves you spending decades repeating yourself, chasing your tail, like Chinese civilization. Joe knows that.
And he tells me I am not doing that.
You young folks may not understand what that means to me.
But the rest of you young ‘uns are all a bunch of brats, so who cares?
Joe says I’m a pain in the ass, but I’m worth the pain.
And I was joking about the rest of you being brats.
They’ll believe that won’t they, Joe?
Joe Rorke said that he had finally given up on me after he had been isinterepreted 27 times in these pages.
I just got embarrassed on Stormfront because I read only one entry by somebody and then gave them advice as young man.
It turned out that Christian Identity was not only a young woman, but she was pretty young woman who had put her picture inthe Pic Thread I was writing in.
I explained to her that the old man got confused:
“At my age, young lady, the brain is the second thing to go.”
She’s a sweet girl, so she did my humiliate me by making me specify what the FIRST things is.
But the POINT of this piece is that I cannot and will not improve, however hard I try.
When you are young, you slowly get to understand that people, even the people who pretend to be perfect, make mistakes.
As you get really mature you learn that people make the SAME mistakes over and over and over and over.
So I am going to misinterpret you, over and over and over.
1) I am not going to read what you said carefully enough.
2) I am going to be reminded of a lifetime of mistakes people have made, and use your writing as an example of that mistake. This is BAD.
There re two ways to deal with this.
One is to refuse to put up with it any more.
The other is to recognize that, despite my honst and truly desperate efforts to avoid it — and please note that I said that — this comes with the territory called Bob.
When I read what you say, my mind starts working. It often starts weorkingo n things you did NOT say.
Taken in context, this is NOT an insult.
It is inconsiderate, but it is NOT an insult.
And I can’t help it.
My mind moves very, very fast, and often precisely what you said gets lost in what you made me think of.
So the result of what I say will often be unfair to you. It may be completely off of what you said.
A toughold turkey like Joe Rorke decided he wouldn’t put up with it. Then he decided, “Oh, to hell with it, I will.”
Shari must find this really hard to put up with.
Help me out, gang. I get you wrong, but EVERYBODY gets you wrong.
I can spend all my thought on getting you exactly right or I can just blather away and make points you will not find elsewhere.
You have the comments section to straighten me out. But if I had somebody like me to read, I wouldn’t give a flying rip if he happened to get me wrong a lot.
I know it’s asking a lot, but let the old buffallo roam, even if he does leave his chips in inconvenient places.
Bob is a screwup.
But he is very unique screwup. An irreplacable screwup.
And he asks your tolerance and your help.
I could have called this “LibAnonII,” but I thought the title above was catchier.
I was reading another comment said Anonowitz, and I noticed he said more or less what I just said in anwer to his comment below.
He began, as all good people should, by quoting me:
‘What LibAnon is talking about goes much deeper.”
The credit is all yours, Bob. I simply took your Whitakerism, which was a classic, and proceeded to ask the Whitaker question: “Yeah, but did it WORK?”
Based on the evidence, my provisional answer is “yes”. Centuries of priestly celibacy in Europe undoubtedly did lower the average IQ among whites — how could it not have? On the other hand, the Odinism inherent in the white gene pool would not, in my opinion, have culminated in science, technology, and world conquest had white Europe remained a group of pagan tribes. The culture of the “West” as we know it today, a compound of Germanic and Greco-Roman institutions, was largely the creation of the (Carolingian and Ottonian) Holy Roman Empire, presided over by the Church. In other words, the Germanic genetic heritage was necessary, but not sufficient, to create the civilization we’re trying to defend today.
LibAnon in his comment below is sinking back into all the non-Whitaker arguments and missing the exact points I am trying to make.
But if this is what he got, it means I am doing something wrong.
I am thinking as I write, so don’t stop with my first comments.
“Bob, you’re arguing today like a member of an official Oppressed Minority Group. White people, you say, can’t be that dumb because we invented horseshoes, those tests don’t measure REAL intelligence anyway, and besides, our people were genetically sabotaged by a thousand years of ‘Middle Eastern crap.’”
*****LibAnon, my first rule, as you should know by now, is that I NEVER go on the defensive.
***** First of all, what I discovered during this discussion of “middle east crap” was something that was entirely different from what I started with a few months ago. This self-destruction program of whites did NOT staryt with “middle eastern crap.”
***** The opposite is the case. The Ideal of Sterility has nothing to do with the Old Testaments or Semites. It came from a religion what was officially limited to Aryans an degenerated.
**** That was a great discovery for me, and it bothers me that you misssed it completely.
*** A lot of people have asked me what is so self-destructive in our race. I came up with at least a start at a beginning of an exampleto work with.
**** You will NEVER see me say “those tests don’t measure real intelligence anyway.” I have been working onthese tests, blood groupings, EEGs and a lot else for over forty years at a professional level, we were asked to present one paper at Walter Reed Hospital, and my attitude wouuld take a LOT of explaining.
***** A third point you missed here is that I am NOT talking about some ability to “creat a civilization.” That is, once again, a standard point that is PRECISELY what I am NOT saying. See below.
What’s the difference between that and African Americans who argue “we can’t be DAT dumb because brothers invented peanut butter and traffic lights AND dem tests don’t measure REAL intelligence anyhow AND besides the white man been keepin’ us DOWN, five hundred years of oppression, yo”?
****** You have a good point here. We must not get into this defensive crap.
****** But remember my BIG point, the one no one else makes:
**** Creating **A** civilization is like ants creating an ant hill.
**** Creating one more civilization is of no importance whatever. What whites have created is a pathway to the stars.
My point is, who cares? When it comes to the qualities necessary to build a civilization that GOES SOMEWHERE, IQ is pretty far down the list. No society has EVER been run, except into the ground, by intellectuals. Intellectuals are servants and can’t succeed as anything else.
**** Now we’re cooking!
**** Every “other Great Civilization” got to the point where it found geometry or something and then the priesthood took over and it stagnated until it turned brown and died away.
**** In hte case of the Great Native American Civilizations, they were colored alrady, built things, stagnated and went away, leaving us to gawk at the greatnes of that particular glorified ant hill.
**** Reading what you said, it occurs to me tha the minute smart people stop impressing people with what they DO and start calling themselves intellectuals or Great Goobies or priests of Ammon, the stagnation phase is under way.
The true strength of our race is not our collective intellectual ability, measurable or not, but our faith, our passion, our sense of beauty, our sense of loyalty, honor and fair play, and our grateful curiosity about the world outside our own heads. In other words, our religious sense. That’s what makes us unique and gives our race its unique power.
***** As so often happens, I glory in your sentiments but I disagree with your logic.
***** By now you know my favorite NC saying, “You’re ugly, your feet stink, and you don’t love Jesus.”
**** On our level, it refers to the idea that accomplishment comes from virtue.
**** The Aryan group does have “our faith, our passion, our sense of beauty, our sense of loyalty, honor and fair play, and our grateful curiosity about the world outside our own heads. In other words, our religious sense. That’s what makes us unique and gives our race its unique power.”
**** I think that is largely CONCOMMITANT, not causal.
I read in this morning’s newspaper that it has been recently discovered that even songbirds can do arithmetic and parse grammatical structures. So much for Noam Chomsky, who thinks that such abilities are what defines humanity. Let’s leave such extravagant overestimation of the ability to perform such tricks, which we share with animals, to the Noams of the world. It’s something we’re picking up from the “Judaized cultural imperium” (to use Kevin Macdonald’s phrase) in which we live, and we need to get over it.
***** Noam Chomsky will naturally believe that what Jews excel in is what “humanity” is all about.
***** But what you saying precisely in line with my observation.
***** I was talking about other people’s — not Bob’s — obsession with MEASURABLE INTELLIGENCE. I already put it in all-caps several times, and I don’t know how to make it more clear.
**** I made a typically Whitaker observation that no one else thought about: This measurable IQ could have been made higher by Jews who concentrated on that sort of ability, in order to encourage it.
**** In the decades I have been on this IQ business, EVERYBODY has mentioned the probability that Jews have bred for the things that made for a higher IQ, and Jews have a higher MEAURABLE INTELLIGENCE now.
**** Nathaniel Weyl was discussing that in the 1950s, and it wasn’t new THEN.
**** But no one has mentioned even the possibility that a thousand years of the church doing exactly the opposite may have had the opposite effect on us.
**** Except Weyl, who is a Jew. He indicated that white gentiles had pushed their IQ down, and stopped there.
**** If you are an IQ nut, the implications would be, and I know people who fell for it, that Jews are specially bred to rule.
***** According tot hat theory, we are permanently crippled.
**** So our proving that black IQ was lower than white was used to prove Jewish Supremacy.
**** So many of the comments on what I said are correctly replying that IQ is not the only thing here. But in doing so they seem to be saying that I indicated something about IQ I did NOT say.
***** My point is that we are the only NON-ANTS around.
***** What do Jews and Orientals, inthe absense of white gentiles, DO with all that puzzle-solving and reading IQ they have?
***** They study their Ancient Scripts and they stagnate until somebody comes along and burns their Ancient Wisdom.
****** As a matter of simple arithmetic, the church may have lowered our average IQ.
***** That’s an interesting point. But regardless of that, we are still the only humans in town.
***** As LibAnon points out, BIRDS can do what Jews and orientals can do. Ants can do it better.
**** It reminds of what Carleton Putnam said fifty years ago in response to the people who kept saying blacks had much better sense of rythme and were greater athletes than whites:
“Canaries sing beautifully. And every year a HORSE wins the Kentucky Derby.”
Comment by LibAnon
In comments responding to “The Church’s War Against Genetic Intelligence” people are still finding it impossible to see that I am talking about TESTABLE intelligence, the stuff Orientals and Jews are so good at.
Going through this for the unpteenth time on Stormfront, in the middle of a reply, a very important point hit me.
Here is the exchange. The IMPORTANT point is in the last part of my reply below:
Very true, but not my point.
Please realize that I am very aware of hte difference between creativity, constructive ability and TESTABLE intelligence.
All we are talking about when someone praises Orientals and Jews is TESTABLE intelligence. TESTABLE intelligence, literacy and so forth, was exactly what the church looked for when it made a eunuch out of any boy who showed special reading ability.
A child who was good at reading was “for the church,” and therefore had chastity pushed on him.
All I say is a matter of simple logic. This breeding program pushed down the TESTABLE intelligence that makes IQ nuts say Orientalsd nad Jews are master races.
In, fact, you have hit on exactly the point that kept this from being a total disaster. The church may have tried to make the kids who showed testable talents into eunuchs, but it did NOT get all the ones who didn’t SHOW their creativity and productivity by a special talent for reading, etc.
IN FACT, YOU JUST MADE ME THINK OF SOMETHING:
The genes that survived the thousand years of church-sponsored dysgenics wold be precisely those of creative, brilliant people who did NOT show an obvious special talent in TESTABLE areas or in reading and writing.
That would mean that a large of our treasuryof good genes are in the classes of our people who are brilliant but don’t show it in an obvious way.
Which may be why I have aleays been puzzled at how people worshipped professors and I thought so much of blue-collar people.
We have all noticed that the brains and common sense are not in the professors.
There may be a whole story in that.
\[QUOTE=Ibere]Just because a person can’t read or write doesn’t mean that he is not intelligent. There are a lot of great men in history that couldn’t do either. There are a lot of people with B.S. and P.H.D.’s who don’t have enough sense to come in from the rain. Just my opinion.[/QUOTE]
LibAnon says, beginning with a quote from me,
“centuries of church breeding for lower IQs”
But this same institution created what we now know as Europe, which conquered the world. So perhaps the priests were wiser than our latter-day (and extremely Jewish) obsession with IQ might lead us to believe.
Rather than preventing smart people from breeding, the Church’s main intent was more likely to have been to liberate the intellect from the burdens of economic necessity and domestic responsibility. This institutional sequestering of the intelligentsia therefore led directly to the invention of modern science, technology, and other achievements unique to European civilization.
Also, there is considerable evidence that “breeding for intelligence” is actually dysgenic, not eugenic. Centuries of this practice among the Jews, for instance, has led to moral and physical qualities that Jews themselves often find repugnant, together with disproportionately high levels of neurosis and mental illness. There is also evidence that today’s rapidly increasing rate of autism among children is linked to the increasing number of couples in which both partners are highly intelligent, to the point that autism has often been called “nerd syndrome”.
So perhaps the Church got it exactly right. The best “group evolutionary strategy” is to seek out the nerds and free them to think, but also to discourage them from biologically reproducing.
Comment by LibAnon
We have a fundamental historical disagreement here.
You say that the Christian Church created today’s Europe.
As you know, since you read my last book, I believe that Odin’t knowledge-based religion reflected the fact that a scientific Europe was already here.
In the so-called Dark Ages, the “barbarians” introduced a sane harness that did not choke a horse the way the Roamsn had done, they invented horse shoes. I can’t remember the rest of the list, but they revolutionized technology in a way Romans never could.
It took us a thousand years to reintroduce knowledge as a goal inthe middle eastern jungle known as Christian thought, and the job hasn’t been done yet.
If you have any illusions that this insanity has been overcome, read National Review.
Remember what my POINT was. It coincides perfectly with yours.
I was simply saying that church policy on the Ideal of Sterility has probably brought down the average IQ of whites. The simple fact that this would have brought down the average testable IQ has never been discussed by those who keep pointing out that AVERAGE IQ among Jews and Orientals is higher.
That is a matter of simple arithmetic.
That is usual Whitaker point. Something everybody else will soon consider obvious jumped out at me.
Nobody else would have noticed it, but it jumped out at me.
Soon evrybody will say it was obvious and they knew it all along.
That piece of simple arithmetic is Point One.
Now let’s go on to Point Two, YOUR point.
Whatever the churches did to average IQ, it did not affect the fundamental fact of race.
Rushton is an IQ fanatic. Bless him, he demands the preservation of our race because he sees our race as his family. That will do since he is on our side in terms of racial survival.
But Rushton sincerely believes that the higher average IQ of Jews and Orientals gives them a FUTURE, regardless of whether whites become brown or not.
Now let me digress again to show you my way of thinking.
I have said many times I have brought up what would happen if you tuned into a program on BBC or PBS and heard them saying, “They are One With Nature, they take only what they need. You may think they are cruel, but what they are doing is in tune with Nature.”
What would happen is that you would not know whether they were talking about wolves or Indians.
By exactly the same token, it is impossible to tell whether someone is commenting on Orientals or ants.
“They work hard. They deal with problems. They have highly complex societies.”
I defy you to know whether they are talking about Orientals or ants until they tell you.
Both Indians and wolves have enormous virtues within their static environment. They do not destroy nature, they fit into it. Both Indians and ants can routinely endure agonies that we award medals for.
Ants are heroic workers, asking nothing for themselves.
But neither Indians nor wolves nor ants nor Orientals are GOING ANYWHERE.
The cirle Orientals are going around in is much, much bigger than the circles ants go around in.
But if BBC or PBS left and came back to earth in a thousand years, they woud expect the ants, the orientals, the wolves and the Indians to be going around in the same Highly Virtuous circles. They would all be Highly Virtuous.
Raise the average Oriental IQ ten points and their circle will be wider than it was before.
Give them bigger, stronger legs and they will break Olympic records right and left.
They will go around the same track MUCH faster.
I did NOT say that Jews have benefitted greatly by pushing their testable IQ up to Oriental levels.
In fact, as LibAnon points out, the higher IQ that comes naturally to Orientals has produced neuroses in Jews who have articificially bred them higher.
Read Portnoy’s Complaint.
What I pointed out was a simple matter of arithmetic.
What LibAnon is talking about goes much deeper.
In fact, what LibAnon has to say requires me to do something desperate:
I am going to have to THINK about it.
Talking about my articles on the churches’ historical war against genetic intelligence, Kane says,
“A lot of those eastern european converts I was talking about converted to avoid wars between Christians and Muslisms. That’s a bit of an intellectual move right there. Of course, if you are one of those people who chooses not to believe in the conversion and believes that the Jews of today are the same ethnically as the Jews of the bible, this data won’t really help you reach any conclusions. ”
Kane, I have practically gotten a hernia from making hte point, over and over, that the so-called “Jews” today have no relationship to the Old Testament Jews.
Most of the Roman “Jews” were the Hellenized Jews who became the Christian Church in the first place.
I have said that so many times that others have told me they are bored with it.
Keep hitting me with the facts.
They’ll sink in eventually.
Shari put in two comments:
“Yes, Please don’t give up. As you said, a match will be lit. No matter how smart someone is they can’t know everything so you just never know when. ”
Comment by Shari — 4/23/2006 @ 6:25 pm | Edit This
“ps. I do know that there is a difference between a seminar and a lecture, so I should probably shutup entirely.”
Comment by Shari
Shari, I will make a deal with you.
I won’t give up if you will STOP PUTTING YOURSELF DOWN.
In an earlier comment you said something else about how your opinions were somehow ill-informed a little while back.
The guys here have already caught hell for doing that, and every one of them knows that if they did what you are doing I would come down on them like an avalanche.
You don’t see Elizabeth saying her opinions are somehow not worth while.
I approve every single comment that appears here.
That means that I approve everything you say here.
If you said anything really stupid or ingorant I would mention it, though I admit I would be nicer to a female than to a male.
Leave it to ME to correct you.
Bob is not the nicest guy in the world.
Bob also has a lot of confidence in his own judgement. You forget that when you apologize for what you say you are apologising for something I have approved and something I can comment on if I want to.
An apology on your part, though you sincerely do not realize it, is a hint that I don’t know how to do what I’m doing.
Shari, I KNOW what I am doing.
I made a very good living doing what I am doing.
I approve your comments and reply to them because I, Robert Walker Whitaker, consider them WORTH reading and WORTH responding to.
You just think about what you want to say and SAY it.
The rest is MY business.