Search? Click Here
Join the BUGS Team! Post on the internet along with us to fight White Genocide!

Lisa– DUHHH! Again

Posted by Bob on April 26th, 2006 under Comment Responses


Lisa shows the intellectual powers of the opposition by a one-sentence comment:

“What the f*** are you talking about?”

It would be the usual reaction for me to concentrate on the obscenity and her hostility.

But I try to notice the implications of the exact words people use.

When you hate somebody and you want to hit at them, you say soemthing about them or you condemn what they say. Lisa did netiher. Instead she used a form of condemnation which is common to “anti-racists.”

Her condemnation was that she did not understand what I said. If you think about it, that is a common “anti-racist” tactic. If you think about it a bit more you will realize that is a rather ODD tactic.

Obviously if she does not understand what I am saying I am supposed to immediately understand that that proves that there is something wrong with ME. You can understand a lot about those people if you think about this carefully.

In the 1950s, when all media and publishing was in New York City, it was not just assumed that New Yorkers were sophisticated, but that New Yorkers WERE sophistication itself. If you didn’t know your way around New York you were a rube.

In my teens I called that “New York provincialism” and absolutely NOBODY, even down South, could understand what I meant.

Honestly, they were mystified by the term “New York provincialism.”

Not just New York liberals but midewestern and Southern conservatives took it so much for granted that New York MEANT sophisticationthat they honestly could not understand what I meant.

Today everybody does. Then NOBODY did. Such is the gap I have to explain between now and then.

A lot of people would brag that they were just country boys at heart. They didn’t WANT to be sophisitcated New Yorkers. But it never occurred to them that New Yorkers who knew nothing about anywhere but New York, the people who later referred to middle America as “flyover country,” were not sophisticated.

Remember tha when New York began to recognize the West Coast as another sophisticated place, they used the term “flyover country” as a BRAG. They were sophisticated because they knew BOTH sophisticated places, the West Coast AND New York. Those who lived inthe flyover country in between were all hicks.

Can you put yourself into those times and understand exactly how they thought?

If you can, you can begin to understand why anti-racists think that the fact they cannot understand what I am saying should shame ME.

The New Yroker of hte 1950s took it for granted that if someone didn’t know his way around New York City, that person was a hick and a rube and should be ashamed of himself.

Believe it or not, the IDEAL sophisticate back then was someone who proudly knew about nothing BUT New York City. He had been sophisticated all his life. He knew nothing BUT sophistication.

Like people who said “flyover country,” someone who said he knew about nothing but New York City was BRAGGING.

I’m deadly serious here.

So the anti-racist always tells us that anybody who doesn’t agree with him is IGNORANT.

Ignorant of WHAT?

Everybody today who has been in the school system, and especially at the college level, knows all about the ideas the anti-racist, the proponent of “diversity,” is espousing. Anti-racists simply cannot believe that. They assume that the only reason we could possibly disagree with what they say is because we haven’t HEARD it all a hundred times before.

How on earht could anybody get a college degree witout being able to recite every single word the anti-racist says, from rote memory?

Butu they honestly don’t realize that. They believe we haven’t HEARD it all, at length, over and over and over and over, just as they hace when they were sitting in exactly the same classes. They couldn’t get a degree without being able to recite it all, but it never occurs to them that we couldn’t get a degree without being able to recite it either.

So they honestly believe that, degree or not, we never heard what they are parroting. They honestly believe we are “ignorant,” just as the person who proudly denounced “flyover country” genuinely believed he was showing that he was a Man of the World, a true sophisticate.

If you didn’t know New York, you were a rube. If you knew anything BUT New York, you were a hick.

That last sentence is IMPORTANT.

For the anti-racist, if you don’t agree with the line they are repeating, you must not have heard it, so you are ignorant. But remember the last sentence of that paragraph:

If you know anything BUT the “diversity” line they are repeating, you are a provincial, a hick, a racist, and a rube.

If you know anything BUT the “diversity” line, they take it for granted you should be ashamed of yourself.

So if you knew any place but New York or the West Coast, you were ignorant, a provincial, a rube and a hick to those who talked about “flyover country.”

So Lisa says that if I say anything outside of anti-racist orthodoxy, she is proud to say she cannot understand a word of it. She takes it for granted that we all know that I should be ashamed of myself.

So “What the f*** are you talking about?” for Lisa is exactly the same as the New Yorker in the 1950s who proudly proclaimed that he knew nothing about anywhere but New York City. It is a “flyover country” type brag on her part.

Someone who was raised in “flyover country” and knows a lot about it, like me, is proving that he should be ashamed of himself.

She thinks she has humiliated me.

She really does.

She HONESTLY does.

Today it is almost impossible for any literate person NOT to understand what I meant in the 1950s by “New York City provincial.”

Today it almost impossible for a literate person to belive that when a person referred to “flyover country” in the 1960s he was BRAGGING.

And if I am still around, I will trying to explain to people how, back at the turn of the century, when someone said he couldn’t understand anything that wasnt a repeat of hte “diversity” line, he was ctually BRAGGING.

Today we all take it for granted that New York City provincial who is proud of being New York City provincial is a moron. Nobody says “flyover country” any more, because they would be ashamed to be that provincial.

It won’t be all that long before everybody will understand that somebody who BRAGS that he cannot undertand anything but the Politically Correct line will be recognized as feeble-minded. The process is already under way.

It won’t be all that long before everybody knows how silly a person is who simply cannot understand an idea that Mommy Professor didn’t cram down their throats.

I knew that going in. I knew that fifty years ago.

But it’s nice to see that I’ve lived long enough for the world to catch up.

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail
  1. #1 by Peter on 04/27/2006 - 2:18 pm

    Yes I have run into this tactic often lately.

    It is:

    “I am so much smarter than you. I cannot understand what you are saying.”

    It always accompanies a malicious smirk.

  2. #2 by joe rorke on 04/27/2006 - 6:57 pm

    I can recall this pathetic tactic going way, way back. It’s nothing new. These are people who can’t climb into the ring with you so they come up with brilliant remarks such as the woman in question did. These are little people, tiny people who know they are wrong but will never admit it. I have nothing to say to them.

  3. #3 by Buddy on 04/30/2006 - 9:17 pm

    It would be valuable to your readers that they understand what you are saying to them. But it is hard for them to realize how superficial the people who called anyone who disagreed with them as hicks and ” simple ” and who now are forced by reality and their sophisticated friends to embrace the exact opinions to be ” with it “.

    But your readers are in the position I was in back when we were told that there was a satellite circling the Earth . I knew that was true, butI really couldn’t internalize it. It was just impossible to believe something so fantastic. I agreed that it was happening and how and why, but I wasn’t really sure that I believed it, though of course I told everyone including myself that I did.

    So your colleagues and commenters must surely have the same problem : how could those people you describe actually have been as you describe them ? I can be comfortable with this phenomenon myself because even though it is as other-worldly as the satellite, I remember that it was just as you describe.

    For example, I clearly remember books that said that speaking favorably about simple inheritance was discouraged because of the recent experience with the Nazis and Jews; this was in books on genetics and inheritance for scientific students. Now that genetics is a fact of life, those people are forced to speak knowingly of dna and genome, etc. to be sophisticated, to be ” Modern”.

    Buddy

You must be logged in to post a comment.