Archive for October 12th, 2006
Trager needs the old coach to put him through some spring training while we are exchanging ideas. He has gotten intellectually flabby.
Older seminar members don’t need me to remind them of this and Trager may not, but I don’t know where Trager is right now. I don’t put IN MY OPINION here, but it is understood here. Those three words are the key to the kingdom. When I say something here, it comes with IMO.
So, IMO Trager is the classic example of a world class player who has become intellectually flabby for lack of people in his on rarified range to talk to. That was what I criticized in his first entry.
Those of us who are in THIS intellectual league spend our lives talking to people who aren’t. The result is that everything you say is out of their league. You get lazy. You get unorganized and soft. It takes no effort at all to beat the hell out of third rate minds and intellectual fossils.
So you get lazy. You get used toe verybody being impressed by the most superficial observations.
So you get superficial.
I need the old Trager, the one I used to talk with toe-to-toe.
From the outside, it would seem as if Trager has been in the intellectual fast lane the whole time. He has hobnobbed with Nobel Prize Laureates and the leaders of our movement, including William Pierce.
But outside of people like Pierce and me, Trager has been dealing with 1) Lesser minds and 2) Intellectual fossils. A Nobel Prize Laureate, for example, spends the rest of his life on some extension of his basic idea. The mental flexibility that made his insight goes away.
One Laureate Trager and I know has not had a new idea since Trager and I met forty years ago. He has spent the rest of his life mathematizing his ideas and using Publicchoicespeak. The days when Public Choice was stated in plain English and when it was developing are long gone. Now Public Choice has ‘a literature.”
In academia, when something gets “a literature” it is time to call the undertaker. No one who is not keeping up with “the literature,” who doesn’t talk about the latest pointless jargon and agonized mathematical stuff can talk to those who have turned a living field of thought into an embalming session. You get no more intellectual exercise in dealing with these intellectual fossils than you do from third-rate minds.
We deal here in BASICS, the way Public Choice used to. Trager has been away too long.
Great news, Bob! You can retire now. You can step down. No need to continue with what you are doing. Dave is The Man. He’s got the picture. Amen.
Comment by joe rorke
Now that Trager is here I want to point out to you that you have about the only minds in our generation that are still alive right here. To an old man who presumes to be a leader, what Joe says sounds like a real putdown.
But it is nothing of the sort to me or to Joe.
Dave is getting a lot of fan mail here. Mark said that Dave should have his own blog.
Why reinvent the wheel?
I will, eventually, find out what this bandwidth costs me and whether I can afford it. Dave HAS his own blog, if I have anything to do with it.
Where else, in all the world, will you find a Bob and a Joe to give him hell and talent like Dave and Pain and a giant intellect — though out of shape — like Trager?
How many times do I have to say this:
READ THE COMMENTS.
Damn it, READ THE COMMENTS!
Did I mention READ THE COMMENTS!!!!!!!!!!!!
This blog exists to make you THINK!!!! I am lighting a fire here. YOU are the fire.
Back before he got soft from dealing with third-rate minds and intellectual corpses, Trager made a statement that has sustained me:
“Bob, your talent is that things jump out at you that other people don’t even notice.”
My one goal is for YOU to be the ones that things jump out at.
To my regret, Dave isn’t there yet. Trager has gotten too intellectually soft to be there yet.
But I have never before found a group of minds that are so close!!!
If you read my first book in my own name, you will wonder why it evoked such a furious response. Everything in it is political common sense today. But,as I keep saying, it provoked an infuriated cover article in National Review.
Take the BASICS. Go back to the BASICS. Notice what no one else notices.
You HAVE a blog.
USE the damned thing!
Trager mentions that our race originated somewhere in the northeastern Europe. He hasn’t been reading the blog, so he doesn’t know that I have talked about that point of origin a LOT.
The Bible talks about the Garden of Eden but gives no place for it. But the Bible DOES give a point of origin for the entire human race:
Mount Ararat is not exactly on the Road to Damascus. In fact, the map of the Holy Land you see in church excludes anything but Palestine, and very few events in the Old Testament actually occurred inside that map. Mount Ararat is away the hell out of the area the Old Testament covers. Ararat is right on the coast of the Black Sea, which was formed abruptly, meaning in a day or two, by a titanic flood that inundated a dry and fertile area where the Black Sea now lies.
The bottom of the Black Sea is still sea water. One day, after being eaten at for hundreds of years, the dam of land at what is now Istanbul suddenly collapsed totally, and a wall of water up to three hundred feet high roared across that huge, settled valley.
By a coincidence which would be the next thing to statistically impossible, the flood of Gilgamesh, the flood of the Old Testament, had the remnants of humanity fetching up right on the edge of that disaster.
Which is why I keep harping on Zoroastrianism. The only non-Jew praised in the Old Testament is Cyrus, ruler of Persia. All the evidence except a specific statement demonstrates that the Jews turned their tribal JWHW into the God of the Old Testament entirely as a result of their contact with the Persian Zoroastrians.
OK, let’s put it down to coincidence that the Flood ended up with the only human survivors of the Flood being at Ararat. Let’s put it down to coincidence that the only goy who is specifically named in the Old Testament as “doing the work of God” is the Zoroastrian King of Persia.
But there is a THIRD coincidence. Three titanic coincidences must add up to nothing less than a miracle.
Christianity was absolutely obsessed from the beginning with chastity and the concept that THIS WORLD is evil. Satan tempted Jesus by offering him the Kingdoms of the World. How is it that Jesus would accept the idea that Satan OWNED the kingdoms of this world and could offer them?
How is it that Christianity began with the idea that perfect chastity was a supreme virtue? As Trager says, this jumps out at me, but no one else notices it. There is certainly not one single word in the Old Testament that even hints at the idea that perfect chastity is good.
In fact, the Old Testament states that, “It is better to cast thy seed into the belly of a whore than to spill it on the ground.” One of the points no one challenges that was brought up in the book “The DaVinci Code” was that, at the time of Jesus, it was Joseph’s OBLIGATION to find a mate for his son long before Jesus died on the cross.
For two thousand years, the idea that a Christian has the ideal of chastity has been central to the Christian faith. The Catholic and Eastern Orthodox version of the New Testament has St. Paul saying very specifically:
“A bishop shall have ONE wife.”
But all those who try to trace everything to the Old Testament totally ignore this, the elephant in their theological living room.
Only Zoroastrianism ever declared this world to be the realm of Satan. Manichaeism was invented by Mani, a Christian in Iraq when it was ruled by Zoroastrian Persia.
Another coincidence! A THIRD coincidence! Our entire history for the last two thousand years has rested on a pillar of Zoroastrian thought. Zoroaster taught that there were two powers, the Lord of This World, who was evil, and the Lord of the Next World, who was good.
By the time of Jesus, Zoroastrianism was two thousand years old. It was degenerate. When Islam conquered Persia, the last Zoroastrian ruler, the ruler of a religion which limited its membership specifically to Aryans, was a mulatto.
There is fourth coincidence. The Jews rejected Christ, but the Zoroastrian Magi accepted him. But we are becoming ridiculous here. I am pounding in the obvious.
Good or bad, the entire context of the New Testament is from Aryan sources. The OLD Testament all the way back to Ararat is from Aryan sources. Indo-European sagas go right back to The Flood.
“Mankind” and “Indo-European” are the same thing.
Which, I think, is relevant to the whole question of defining “our” race.
Oh, sure, everything can turn into verbiage (NOT fine white powder, as you used to say). I am not sure how it could be otherwise. Once primates developed the ability to form new concepts, they were bound to come up with ones that corresponded to nothing in the external world. The *Racial* difference is that one small group in the remote northwest corner of the vast Eurasian landmass had a critical number of folks who insisted on checking ideas against the facts. It only took a critical mass of such determined objectivists to change the world, but this does not mean that there were very many of them. It is quite apparent to me every day that such thinkers are very few. Just vastly more numerous in the White race.
Comment by Trager Smith
I am very glad to have Trager back! He and I have been in this seminar together for over fifty years. I need him and he needs me. He can give us an incredible amount.
Trager is the person who said to me years ago, “Bob, your talent is that things jump out at you that other people completely miss.”
Let me give an example of that to deal with another of Trager’s comments.
I can’t FIND it, but Trager made a comment about DEFINING “our” race. That is because he has been attending those intellectual funerals too damned long. This is the sort of “intellectual” stuff that is death in the real world.
I hope the time comes when we are in a position to waste time on such trivia. But in the real world we have no difficulty knowing that our race is under genocidal attack. If you want to know what “white” is, read Bob’s Mantra:
” Liberals and respectable conservatives 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.”
HERE IS WHAT HAS HUMPED OUT AT ME THAT NO ONE ELSE HAS NOTICED:
Within a year of the collapse of the Soviet Empire, a general topic of media discussion was, “Is Eastern Europe READY FOR IMMIGRANTS yet?”
If Vietnam threw off the Reds, no one would even think of the question, “Is Vietnam ready for immigrants yet?” and we all know it.
What jumps out at me is what everybody else takes so much for granted that it never comes up.
Why, exactly, does everybody keep pressing Putin and other Eastern European leaders about whether their country is READY for immigrants yet? We all know it is because they are WHITE countries.
We all KNOW that, but nobody SAYS that.
Trager, “white” has already been defined for us. Everybody knows what it is or we wouldn’t take that “ready for immigration” line as so routine that we don’t even NOTICE it. You want to spend time defining it, but what is important here is that it is already defined, or you would have NOTICED the point I just made.
If you ant to know whether a people is white, simply look at whether immigration to those countries is being talked about.
It is ridiculous for us to get into definitions of something that has already been defined so far down into your parietal lobe that you don’t even notice it.