I might as well keep talking to myself here.

As I discussed in an ignored article below, our previous problem was that we had to settle for organizing the masses, since the top of the idea chain was carefully protected at Harvard and in New York. Now the top of the idea chain is literally at our finger tips.

This changes EVERYTHING.

Someone dealt with my article Pro-White Collaborators on Stormfront with the reasonable suggestion that a real history of the pro-white movement be written. But that won’t do it PRECISELY because of what I just mentioned. All the sex appeal is in Torch Light Parades a la Hitler or the forty thousand Klansmen marching in DC in 1927.

Trying to describe the importance of the intra-conservative battle which led to the “Wallace” vote becoming the Reagan Democrats and therefore to the end of the Soviet Empire holds no place in history compared to “Mr. Gorbeczev, tear down this wall!”

In the American media, as I said an ignored article, the emphasis is on shouting enemy victories and minimizing our wins. All the Torchlight Parade stuff is THEIRS.

No, a history won’t do it, because a history of events has very little to do with a history of real power.

History and predicting the future have this same problem. In order for there to be a book on the future, somebody has to PAY for it. The whole field of Futurology has no connection to the future at all. Successful futurologists are people who get money and fame for predicting what people who have money and who buy books and who grant academic titles TODAY want to hear and deem reasonable.

The future is NEVER what people today deem reasonable. Least of all is the future ever what people in power and money TODAY deem reasonable.

Pain asks me to be more specific abut what I EXPECT. I can’t, precisely because I don’t KNOW what the future holds.

I do know that every Tough, Practical Man would have said I 1980, “So the whole Soviet Empire is just going to fold up and go away? Don’t be RIDICULOUS!”

In 1980, you would find out about the future of the Soviet Union by talking to a Sovietologist. Not one of them predicted anything like what happened. That is because Sovietologists concentrate on getting PAID, not on predicting the REAL future.

The end of the Soviet Union was being determined inside the minority party, getting them to go for the “Wallace” vote. How in Heaven’s name could a professional historian or Futurologist or Sovietologist, whose JOB depends on ignoring anything outside of Harvard and New York, POSSIBLY have a clue about THAT?

This is an example of how making a living predicting the future makes one absolutely helpless in the fact of the REAL future. The strategy Reagan used to bring down the Soviets had been publicly discussed among paleoconservatives for decades. Burnham talked about it for years in National Review.

Reagan found his Last Straw for the Soviet camel in the Strategic Defense Initiative, SDI. Senator Kennedy called it “Star Wars.” He never knew how close he was. SDI was invented by a SCIENCE FICTION WRITER, Larry Niven, in a conference Reagan had with science fiction writers.

Why would an incoming president have a conference with people no PAID “intellectual” would take seriously?

Because Reagan did not need someone to organize a torchlight parade. He needed people who could THINK. He did NOT need more people who knew how to say what they could get PAID for in the Fashionable Opinion market place.

In other words, a history of pro-white victories wouldn’t do the job because most pro-whites wouldn’t recognize a victory when they SAW one.

The article below demonstrates the two rules you have to follow to be a Respectable Conservative:

1) Declare that liberals were always right until 1970 an grovel loudly about how bad conservatives were to oppose them and

2) NEVER remind a liberal that they were DEAD WRONG about ANYTHING.

This is easy for us to understand. But it is a lead-in to a point about many or most pro-whites which is NOT recognized.

It took US many, many years of facing professional ruin and angry mobs to get rid of what was absolute post-World War II doctrine: “Modern anthropology has proven that all races are equal in all in innate abilities” – a word or two varied, but it was always the same words. But if you ask most pro-whites, we never won a victory.

The myth of Soviet economic growth was dogma in the early 1960s. A few of us pointed out reality. It was by realizing that the USSR could not compete with America that led to what Kennedy denounced as “Star Wars’ and the collapse of the USSR. Gorbachev believed we could build a Strategic Defense Initiative and he is ON RECORD as promising ANYTHING to stop it.

SDI called the Soviet bluff. They simply couldn’t REALLY compete with America in any technical. This led to Soviet concessions, and the whole house of cards collapsed.

Liberals say it all just happened to happen on Reagan’s watch. Conservatives keep their mouths shut.

I spent a large part of my life on THAT, so it matters to me, but our subject here is RACE.

Due to science and due to OUR efforts, the average anti concedes things about genetics that he would have gotten conservatives to LYNCH somebody for saying a generation ago.

Pro-whites beat their chests endlessly about how brave THEY are and, as one person put it, “THEY can’t cut their out of a paper bag with a machete.”

I lived through the FBI Terror against the South, and that was NO PAPER BAG. Ignoring the Mafia, J. Edgar Hoover spent untold millions of dollars infiltrating pro-whit organizations. I just fought integration legally, and I had an FBI file by age fifteen.

Te Feds sent us to prison in droves. Those prisons were NOT paper bags, especially for OUR people. But here is some newbie bitching about how brave he is. That’s not important in itself. It is merely a symptom of the REAL disease.

The REAL disease is that pro-whites does EXACTLY what respectable conservatives do. They NEVER acknowledge that, against what was considered both insuperable power and Historical Inevitability, we WON SOME. Their time might better be spent learning about HOW to win some against these overwhelming odds RATHER THAN REPEATING THE ENEMY LINE THAT OUR ENEMIES NEVER LOST.

If you want to make your living in the media as an anti-liberal spokesman, there are two rules you must follow:

1) Grovel loudly, grovel often, and grovel FIRST.

When David Irving was sent to prison in Austria for disputing the number of Jews Hitler killed, Buckley jumped right on the bandwagon jumped right into the lynch mob, while other conservatives simply didn’t mention it.

Conservatives grovel endlessly about how THEY were not fighting for integration when Southerners were saying it would lead to intermarriage, to a collapse of school standards, to schools where kids would have to searched for weapons.

Conservatives says immigration somehow got out of hand, but they are ashamed that some conservatives did not support ending the racist National Origins quota system in 1965.

National Review runs front page articles praising Franklin Roosevelt.

Rue Two is related:

2) NEVER remind a liberal that the LEFT was ever WRONG.

You will never see a leftist groveling. Here is how the LEFT handles defeat:

The New York Times mentioned that “the hereditarian position on race is now much more acceptable than previously.”

Period.

Not a word about how he left demanded that anyone who said that “modern anthropologists have proven the races are equal in all innate abilities,” was immediately declared anaziwhowantedtokillsixmillionjews by the New York Times for decades. Not a word about the lynch mobs they commended against such heretics.

Every statement that the Communist economies were catching up to the West, repeated decade after decade, is forgotten. We found out that the entire Soviet economy, after seventy years of “progress,” was half the size of the economy of the Netherlands.

When a liberal makes another fashionable statement, no conservative will ever remind him of THOSE.

When the files of the KGB were opened at the beginning of the 1990s we found that McCarthy’s claims of Communist infiltration into the American government were, in fact, too modest. But when a liberal cries “McCarthyism,” you show you a re a True Hannity or the stuff National Review editors are made of by taking them seriously.