One of the characteristics of The Information Age is how quickly The Party Line becomes BORING. In the 1950s I found a lot of people who had not even realized how repetitive the Liberal Lines were. MOST PEOPLE IN THE EARLY SIXTIES WOULD NOT HAVE UNDERSTOOD THE TERM “POLITICALLY CORRECT.”
You do not understand what a change has taken place. You cannot understand the RELIEF of not having to explain. On the objective, practical side, political correctness is so boring by now it drives watches, readers and listeners up the wall.
An example of this was the hook used to grab watchers on a History Channel documentary. It began by quoting people as saying that the first Americans were hunters who crossed the Bering land bridge about 13,000 years ago, i.e., Amerinds. They promised to explode this myth.
Only after five minutes or so of this hook did they say they were going to explode the myth that these Indians were JUST HUNTERS. Then they settled down to the standard revelation that Indians were geniuses with an astonishingly sophisticated technology.
Now what if they had started off announcing that this was one more repetition of the “astonishingly advanced” line? Indians are regarded as primitive, the television Indian specialists tell us, but they were really more sophisticated than we are. Ants are regarded as mindless, say the official ant specialist, but they have better minds than we do. I am confidently awaiting the amoeba specialists revelation of the sophistication of amoeboid society.
But not only is this boring and everybody knows it, but the doc specialists KNOW it is boring. They have to promise a politically incorrect revelation about Indian claims to get any audience at all. Once again, if they had started off saying, “This will prove how great Indians really were” they would have had no watchers outside of Mexamerica and the Tribal Lands.
By the way, this is serious business in the Tribal Lands. There is nothing theoretical about the billions of dollars casinos are raking in on white self-hatred, and any threat to that goes straight to Mafia types.
And there is nothing theoretical about THAT. I was amazed when someone quoted a main line book as talking about the threats and murders of the Jewish Mafia in Hollywood. I could not understand it until I found that it was a quote from a biography of REAGAN, showing his bowing to the Jewish Mafia. In their desperation to attack, they are letting a lot of important stuff slip through the cracks.
As in the present case of the left becoming anti-Israelis over Iraq, the left was so anxious to attack Reagan that it ignored Jewish interest in keeping the Jewish Mafia control of Hollywood in the twilight zone of Conspiracy Theory. This was quoted by an anti in SF, and I was the only person who noted it for what it was. Others are so busy arguing their pet theory of Jews that they don’t notice a plum dropped in their laps.
Yes, you can get killed for attacking white self-hate by an accurate history of America. One phone call and a button can be pushed. I’ve lived with that all my life.
Here is a barrier no one mentions on SF, because it is a barrier against someone who is out there actually IN THE FIGHT, not beating their chests from the sidelines. At the same time, I have given you the giant advantage we now have, and that EVERY PROFESSIONAL recognized, of the sheer BOREDOM of ruling opinion.
These are professional observations, not chest-beating and demanding ACTION. Those who shout the loudest don’t even know how to see the battle as it is.
#1 by Dave on 11/15/2007 - 1:00 pm
What is not seen and understood that most political movements in America since WWII has been what I term “a non-motivated” political movements, (e.g., the projects of academics and careerists).
Real political movements are motivated from the human heart. For example, labor strife broke out n America in earnest after the Civil War and remained a bloody struggle up until early 1950s. Few today realize how many bones lie out there in the soils of America of men and women who died in the long running and bloody struggle against brutal labor conditions. But what really brought an end to this heartfelt struggle was chain saw logging and gasoline and electrical powered equipment and tools. The labor movement then became of project of academics and careerists (politicians and lawyers) aimed at extracting unfair economic rents from the general public.
Of course, when the Jim Crow labor system was dismantled by privileged white charities (Marie Antoinette style projects) it was not anticipated that the Negro public would explode into rage at their unwanted beneficence. Negros, having been told by their white masters that they were now “equal”, exploded into a considerable collective temper. You would have too had you worked all those years at half white pay. Madam Roosevelt, accordingly, was beside herself because she couldn’t understand why the Negroes weren’t “grateful” for “fair labor standards”.
We have lived with phony politics for an interminably long time. The last time we had real politics at the street level was Depression era labor strife. Most of conservatism has been entirely phony. The hippie movement and that crap were certainly phony. Regarding domestic issues, little of post WW II politics has been for real. Now we have Libertarianism and that is as phony as it gets.
That is not to say the brand of politics that proceeds from within Federal Agencies and the Pentagon has not been for real. But that is another subject.
But this business of white lands being invaded is not phony. This business of white people losing their national sovereignty is not phony. Accordingly, our struggle is destined to become motivated, to become something that proceeds greatly “from the heart”.
The vast majority of human beings are “tame dogs”. They only respond to lines drawn by others. They are only able to perceive though pictures painted by others. If this were not true, academia could not exist. As AFKAN says, most people can only “paint within the lines” drawn by others. In fact that is what they want to do. They are happy to paint within the lines drawn by others. (As Robert Whitaker has stated about the Chinese, the desire to paint within the lines drawn by white people explains much of the nonwhite world).
But there is a small minority of men (and women) who are “feral dogs”. They draw their own lines and paint their own pictures. They do not subordinate their perceptions of the world to others. Also, they tend to be comfortable with undertaking acts of courage.
These are those who foment real rebellion and real political movements. Robert Whitaker is one of these “feral dogs”. These “feral dogs” enable others to feel what is in their hearts. Accordingly, real rebellions and real political movements proceed from the heart, led by this kind of “feral dog” individual.
While I promote white nationalism, in my own way, armed with Robert Whitaker’s thought, what I am looking for is the response “from the heart”. That is how I know whether I am dealing with a friend or an enemy of our cause.
Most of our opposition are simply dupes. They are not real traitors, just ordinary “tame dogs” wallowing in ignorance. The real traitors tend to hail from academia (e.g., they are college professors) or they are politicians responding to clientele whose treason is economically motivated (agribusiness and Mexican farm labor). These people need to be vigorously attacked and made to suffer. They need to know they are going to be held accountable for their treason.
#2 by Simmons on 11/15/2007 - 2:11 pm
Hey Junkyard Bob all I do when confronted with the PC rigamaroll is ask, “Is this going to be Politically Correct?” I do this in a nice tone hinting that I don’t really have the time or the interest in yet more PC, but I understand the need some people have for PC. But I’m a skeptic and that is what I do. Thanks to Dave for his contribution on the labor movement, maybe we ought to have a Dave column so after I read his comments I do not forget the Bob comments in all the confusion.
#3 by AFKAN on 11/15/2007 - 9:34 pm
Thoughts on some of the Lines:
I have been reading several histories – mostly economic – of the First Great Depression, and notice that:
(1) Most public school graduates have no concept of history prior to 1964, and little after that, and
(2) Depressions are qualitatively different from “recessions” in that they transform the economic system in general, and the financial system, in particular, dramatically.
For instance, after the First Great Depression, all banks – with the exception of a handful of various State-chartered institutions – became part of the Federal Reserve System, as part of the “reorganization” of the financial system.
Owners of gold saw confiscation, then, and, at the right price, will undoubtedly see it again.
Something like that seems to be underway in the derivatives debacle, where a lot of liquidity – a lot of asset value – has been replaced by debt.
One hypothesis to consider is so many banks will have to take back the loans they originated for securitization that they will go under from the collapse in market value of the loans.
Nationally, we will become, de facto, insolvent – on a scale that is literally unimaginable.
THAT is an end result from staying “within the lines,” and not “Seeing” clearly, in terms of direct observation, not being limited to the terms and definitions supplied by Others, and the practice of Wordism/”The Doctrine.”
Thoughts of where this will lead force me to confront feelings of fear for class warfare on a scale few could imagine, including the Hispanic Intifada. Regarding this last, by the way, the Colored Pets are, essentially, doomed…
THAT take us to the alternative political and economic systems that were attempted, and, in a manner that would have made Jack London proud, were so successful they posed a threat to the status quo.
Take Upton Sinclair’s EPIC Program; upon which he damn near became Governor of California. Communities grew up, and prospered, around this model of alternative politics, and economics, which bypassed the middlemen – the Definers of Words and Definitions – of the status quo.
Sinclair was inherently Creative.
We must be, and must ALWAYS look past the false choices offered us, to develop our own Creative Communities, one way or another…
By any means necessary.
#4 by woundednietzsche on 11/15/2007 - 10:04 pm
An interesting read from Luke O’Farrell discussing PC reaction to Watson’s remarks about racial differences and DNA.
“When they demand complete equality, they make the crypto-religious assumption that culture and politics somehow float free of biology. They don’t. Unlike chimpanzees, human beings have culture and practise politics. Why is this? Because there are small but extremely important differences between the DNA of these two closely related species. If small differences in DNA are responsible for the existence of culture and politics in the first place, they can certainly be responsible for cultural and political variations among different races. Believing that race does not exist is again crypto-religious. Watson was attacked because he offended against egalitarian dogma, not because what he said was unscientific.”
http://www.heretical.com/ofarrell/brain.html
#5 by hpfeffer on 11/16/2007 - 5:30 pm
White self-hatred. I don’t get it. Why would white people and ONLY white people hate themselves? It doesn’t make sense.
#6 by Z on 11/17/2007 - 7:55 am
“White self-hatred. I don’t get it. Why would white people and ONLY white people hate themselves? It doesn’t make sense.”
I don’t know if this is the place to learn the basics? As Bob has pointed out, he can’t teach advanced calculus if you don’t know the multiplication tables. Maybe you should go learn the multiplication tables first, before you attend class here? Go to Stormfront and ask these questions, this will only distract us.
#7 by shari on 11/17/2007 - 1:44 pm
hpfeffer, Read on National Salvation.Net. It’s laid out well there. Or listen to Bob’s WebRadio Archive.
Also note which race has been called naziwhowantsto killsixmillionjews if they object to any p.c.
#8 by hpfeffer on 11/17/2007 - 5:10 pm
If white people are hating themselves en masse that is a huge mistake. Perhaps they have been brainwashed into believing that they should hate themselves. In that case, the question is who is doing the brainwashing? I’m white as a sheet and I don’t hate myself. I don’t even dislike myself. I’m not sure that I know any white people who hate themselves.
You know, just a thought.
Henry