Archive for April, 2008
I got four replies to the article below. All four should be put up here in front.
Please read them.
I can relate to this in this way. When I married, a hundred years ago, I can honestly say I NEVER married for money. He was cute, nearly six feet, blue eyes, deep voice, but what got me is that I knew he intended to do his DAMNEDEST. Neither of us had any money, but I wanted a REAL home and a REAL family.
So I understand that it’s what a person REALLY wants that matters.
Unfortunately those who seek power now, seem to want nothing at all , but phony accolades. Perhaps to cover an awful emptyness.
You are confusing POWER and POSITION.
Dave’s comment on power referred to Nixon, and he has the same confusion. Someone once made an observation that really impressed me, “Nixon ran for office to BE something. Regan ran to DO something.”
Nixon wanted to BE a congressman, he wanted to BE president. But if Nixon had never been born, I doubt history would have been changed noticably. There were a hundred interchangable young men in 1946 who could have done the same things. POWER is t ability to CHANGE things.
Nixon had no POWER.
For me the outstanding thing about this election is that no POWER is involved. Neither Obama or Hillary represents any POWER. McCain would do what another traitor would do.
Power, position, money, these are as distinct as good looks, health, wealth and a happy marriage. Each is a FACTOR but there is as much trade off among them as there is direct relationshiup.
I hope to hell I get some thoughts on THAT.
Someone on Stormfront repeated the old line, “Why would somebody spent millions to get a 400,000 a year job?”
So I intrtroduced them to reality again:
I worked on Capitol Hill for a number of years and I never knew a congressman, outside of those who went straight to prison, who did not at least double his income when he left congress. One of my old buddies was congressman with a safe seat but he had to quit because he couldn’t afford it.
When Richard Nixon lost the presidential election of 1960 he took a job with a legal firm in California that paid 930,000 1960 dollars a year, versus the presidential pay of 150,000, but he deeply regretted losing.
I sat with a guy who was making over 500,000 1981 dollars in a bar in DC and he was literally CRYING because he couldn’t get a presidential appointment to a job paying under 100,000.
Some people want money. Others, especially people WITH money, want POWER. I was a recognized and PAID expert on power. If you could just buy power, I would be a LOT richer than I am.
The jobs I held in DC would have paid five to ten times as much in the private sector, but that is strictly theoretical. Anybody who can dedicate the one life he gets on this planet to selling farbric softener DESERVES ten times the money. I could never have done it.
You go to New York or California for money. In DC, the name of the game is power.
And no, you can’t just buy power. Power is a different game altogether.
It’s sort of like what Marilyn Monroe said in “Gentlemen Prefer Blondes” to the father of a rich guy she wanted to marry: “A woman shouldn’t marry a man just because he’s rich any more than a man should marry a woman for her looks. But, my goodness, it HELPS!”
Almost everybody who gets elected or appointed could get a lot more money doing something else. But if you spend your life in the power game, you find that they are very different. Bill Gates did not marry the most beautiful girl in the world or the richest.
Different goals mean entirely different methods.
I have to do a hell of a balancing act here. But like everything I try to do, once you really understand it there is nothing complicated about it. My aim is to get you to use my way of thinking in addition to your own independent thinking. As Shari points out, the reason this seems odd today is because all of us have been “educated” in a way that makes this seem mysterious.
Real intellectuals, back when the seminar was actually a seminar and a Moot was actually a Moot would wonder what my problem is.
AFKAN has ridden this tide very nicely. He has come in under various names with his own message to use BUGS simply as another place to put it. AFKAN was used to people simply refusing to let him have his say, so he persisted. In the cases where a group will simply not listen to us, we are more than accustomed to going on and giving it up.
But AFKAN kept after us because he could tell BUGS was not just tuning him out. AFKAN has my admiration because we are not SEEKING just anybody. Someone who knows how to keep at it IN THE RIGHT WAY is what we are looking for. There are far too many who try and then give up because “Bob is being mean to me,” though of course they don’t put it that way.
I am particularly proud that my talent search found Shari. Shari often seems to be doing the opposite of AFKAN. She explains what I am saying, so it seems as if she is just repeating what we are saying.
Don’t be fooled. My big talent is that things jump out at me that others don’t even notice. The only reason Shari SOMETIMES seems to be repeating what we say here is that what she says fits so seamlessly into the theme. She continues the line of argument, applies it to different cases, and I learn a hell of a lot from a short statement by her.
Shari goes on with the line and I find that, when she does that, there is more to say.
My brag is that damned few people would appreciate both Shari AND AFKAN. I had to stop AFKAN, in his previous incarnations from walking over us and Shari from apologizing for being brilliant.
I was very, very “mean” to BOTH of them.
Those who can’t stand the heat should go to a cooler place than the BUGS kitchen.
We are a seminar. More important, we are a TEAM. That is one reason I am very careful about people who come here for their own message. Every one of us is EXPECTED to have his own message.
This is not a church, this is a seminar. The only party line is how to save our RACE. If that is not your aim, then you simply belong in one the hundreds of thousands of other sites in the Internet.
Unlike the usual church today, there the Party Line ENDETH. There is not a church on earth that ENDETH this way. You BEGIN with a faith in Jesus, for example, but that has to lead on to obedience to the Pope or an opposition to evolution or a dedication to the State of Israel or to Social Progress or Family Values.
BUGS is vitally important to me because I think I have major contributions to make to saving our race and straight thinking. My LIFE has been devoted to that. Please note that this is PERSONAL to me.
So when you drift off into statements you would have made had I never been born, it hurts me PERSONALLY. That’s what Stormfront is for.
I feel vindicated when you can tell from a comment that it fits HERE.
I know I have said this sort of things many times and I will say them again, because it happens to be my life’s work.
So much of what is called education, and those who present themselves as educated, is really disgusting mumbo-jumbo.
I hadn’t realized just how bad it is, since I’m not part of that.
I received this forward. “For those wanting to make a contribution in J’s memory, a student scholarship or award fund is being established in the College of Arts and Sciences, focused on J’s major department of Cognitive Science.
Although the exact nature of the fund is still being determined, it is designed to support scholarship inline with one of J’s central intellectual interests and passions: developing the intersection of sociologcal perspectives and
principals with inquiry in cognitive science, or possibly in cognitive musicology. This poor kid was only 25. It just makes me sick.
AFKAN did it right. Genral Commnets is where you should put something new for the main page.
A theme often returned to here is the moral cowardice of brave men, esp., those of the Greatest Mssturbation. Well, it is alive and well today. The following is from the blog at antiwar.
I Lied and I’m a Coward
I’m not a big fan of the New York Times, but today’s front-page investigative report on the Pentagon’s managing of the news is absolutely first-rate. One of the Pentagon officials, Torie Clarke, the Pentagon’s main propagandist, said her goal had been to achieve “information dominance.” In other words, she wanted the Pentagon’s message to get out and crowd out the independent information from others. To do this, the Pentagon recruited retired military officers and fed them select information that was often at odds with reality. Wow! I’m already sounding like a spin doctor. What I mean in the earlier sentence is that the Pentagon lied.
The payoff for many of these retired officers was that various “defense” contractors for whom they worked got a better shot at military contracts. [Why “defense” in quotation marks? Because most of what the Department of Defense does has nothing to do with defense: it’s offense, much of which makes us less safe.]
Interestingly, some of the retired military knew they were being lied to and passed the information on as truth nevertheless. In other words, they lied. One, General Paul E. Vallely, a FOX News analyst from 2001 to 2007, stated,
““I saw immediately in 2003 that things were going south [in Iraq.]” But on his return, Vallely told FOX’s Alan Colmes, “You can’t believe the progress,” and predicted that the number of insurgents would be “down to a few numbers” within months. Of course, it wasn’t. And it turned out that Vallely didn’t “believe the progress.”
How did they rationalize their lying? Take Timur J. Eads. Please. Eads is “a retired Army lieutenant colonel and Fox analyst who is vice president of government relations for Blackbird Technologies, a fast-growing military contractor.” Eads said he had withheld the truth on television for fear that a four-star general would call and say, “Kill that contract.” I’ve heard of people running from battle because they might be literally killed. And I’m sympathetic. But lying because the consequence of telling the truth is that your employer might lose business and you might get fired? Wowee. Pretty scary.
The whole article is well worth your time.
It confirms Bob’s thesis. These liars probably are bedecked with deserved medals for valor, but they have not the guts to stand up to authority or money. Some things never change.
I meant “black hat” Jews in my post, sorry for my editing mistake. Most people are of the mindset that they want to be positive and do something that matters, which in itself is good and all, I on the other hand will readily admit that I am the devil. I live for that moment when I see the other person go into physical convultions over stress that I induce (but only if they deserve it such as genociders).
Back to the Mantra, on that I was slow to realize that what I was reading was in general my way of subterfuge. Yes I’m working on the respectables, demanding that they please define what “racism” is even if they have to admit that they have spent decades being useless at best.
MGM’s slogan means “art for art’s sake.”
First lesson, if you want to find out what someone REALLY stands for, find the opposite of the line they repeat most. If any employee of MGM had come in with a proposal that a movie be produced entirely “for arts sake,” the question would not be, “Will he be fired?” The only debate would be over whether they would open the door before they kicked him out of it.
I just saw that slogan again at the beginning of a Thin Man movie from the 1930s. The Thin Man, Nick Charles, is ALWAYS drunk. He always has a drink in his hand. A decade or so previously the big movies were attacks on saloons, showing men becoming drunks and ruining their wives and kiddies.
If you don’t like the Tide of Public Opinion, just wait a while. Another one will come along.
I always took the tack of asking them, “explain in exact detail what you mean.” That is because every devotee or cult member is more or less an idiot, and this includes the PhDs, and most mass cults cannot go into “exact detail”, even the wacky black that Jews are reduced to speaking in tongues only amongst themselves never mind the high priests of PC and their jive.
Bob I think you are using the standard talk back to each other method of debate in which you want to exert dominance over the individual. Myself I want the fool opposing me to hate himself when all is said and done, and that is accomplished by severe mental anxiety caused by having them trying to explain their belief that they cannot explain.
I’m an interrogator. One of my opening questions is, “What is racism?”
Pain would understand: This made my morning!
I am obsessive. Your comments are the first thing I look for. This is from somebody who is obviously not just theorizing, he is out there fighting the fight. That last line is priceless to ME!
There was a reason I did what Simmons disapproves of in this case.
In this case, I even left out one thing I always INSIST on, “anti-WHITE,” in order to make ONE point at ONE time. Then Simmons comes in and makes damned sure I remember what the general strategy is.
Actually, I do not use the “What exactly are YOU talking about?” strategy as much as Simmons does. He is out there slamming away at that one. His actions cannot be overpraised.
There are so damned many holes in this Big Lie that you have to LEARN, as a LAB COURSE, which one is best for YOU. That means you have to get out there and DO it. The anti-white thread is a great place for that, but I have a feeling Simmons is hitting them everywhere he MAKES a shot at it.
I made **A** point. Z notes that I made that point very well.
Simmons reminds us of THE point.
Couldn’t be better.
Thanks! My coffee tastes GOOD this morning.
Here I vary from my ALMOST INVARIABLE PRACTICE of ALWAYS refering to OVs as “anti-white.” I am doing it because I am trying to make ANOTHER point and i don’t want to give htem a chance to wiggle.
— We Know Your Stuff, You don’t Know Ours
Let us say that we are in sixteenth century Spain and a Catholic is arguing with Protestants who are remaining anonymous. First of all, WHY swould the Protestants would insist on anonymity?
Let me tell you what the Catholic would NOT say:
A reasonably intelligent Catholic Believer in sixteenth century Spain would NOT explain,
“There is an Inquisition. The Wise Men who run this Inquisition say that the only True Faith is the Holy Catholic Faith.”
Why would he NOT say that? Because it would make them look like fools The Protestants are anonymous precisely BECAUSE they are fully aware that there is an Inquisition.
Something else the Catholic would not do would be to recite the basic teachings of the Catholic Church and expect us, 1) not to know this stuff; and
2) to bow down when we hear that the Ruling Authorities disagree with us.
Any literate person in the sixteenth century had been RAISED in the Catholic Church except Jews. You would assume that even a literate Jew living in a sixteenth century Catholic country ALSO knew the basic doctrines of a Church that controlled all educational institutions outside of the ghettoes.
We get on Opposing Views for a good intellectual battle. We are ready to debate the established religion of OUR time, Political Correctness. It is therefore a hell of a letdown when you quote Political Correct Doctrine at us.
It is hard to believe that any adult outside a retarded home would honestly think that we hadn’t HEARD all this crap. It is hard to believe that anyone outside a home for the retarded would be repeating it to us in the obvious conviction we hadn’t HEARD it already.
Mommy Professor tells you that we take this position because we have not HEARD the shallow clichés of our established religion of Political Correctness. It would take a particularly mindless Catholic in 1550 Spain to think that any literate person RAISED in sixteenth century Spain would not know that all the PAID Authorities agreed that Catholic Doctrine was absolutely true.
If someone back then started out assuming that heretics had never HEARD of the Catholic Church, you would decide he needed a home for the retarded.
Same here. We are heretics. We KNOW what the established religion is. Nothing confirms our opinion of True Believers like your assumption that we don’t.
Those of us who go to the Opposing Views section are interested in a good, solid intellectual FIGHT. Instead we run into people who seem to have escaped from the Home during visiting hours.
We, too, were RAISED in your established religion.
How can ANYBODY think we haven’t heard the Standard Line?
Mommy Professor and the semiliterate black kid says we are “Jus’ IGNUNT.” You have to be a real imbecile to fall for THAT line. We have heard every word of your their doctrine at least as many times as you have.
More. We all know that every established religion concentrates on stamping out all heresy. Since we won’t accept the standard line, we are hit with it over and over and over.
For every time a True Believer like you has been exposed to these standard lines, we have been exposed many times, repeatedly.
Like every True Believer, you cannot believe that anyone who has HEARD the True Faith doesn’t AGREE with it.
So when we come to Opposing Views, we find that the True Believers genuinely don’t believe we have HEARD all the standard stuff. Mommy Professor tells you, “They is jus’ IGNUNT!” You genuinely BELIEVE that the only reason we don’t agree with Mommy Professor is because we have never HEARD Mommy Professor’s Confession of Faith.
Just how smart does that make YOU look?
Jared Taylor has a piece about Asians joining the racial spoils game, at V-dare today. He says that, “Asians could have chosen to emphasize their common intersets with whites-eliminating AFFIRMATIVE ACTION” “Asians can make it in race-blind competion.”
That is just exactly, the premise that leads to “affirmative action” race blindness. This country was founded and established to be a WHITE country. That never meant that non-whites, such as Indians or Negroes, who resided here, were to suffer all kinds of torment and abuse, but DISCRIMINATION, yes. They were to live under OUR laws and make do as separate minorities.
“Race-blind” is the same as anti-racist, is the same as anti-white. I’m not too sure about Jared Taylor.
This was great!
This time, when I went silent for a while, there was no the radio silence we usually get. There was a set of THOUGHTS that set me to thinking. THAT is where we ae going!
You talked about BASICS.
When I come up with a thought, it often seems to me to be so obvious that I have trouble getting anybody but you to understand how long it took me to get it, and why no one would be likely to EVER come up with it.
One commenter talked about the basic w questions, who what where and why. You don’t get that in group which is trying to impress each other with how many details they know. And that means just about any discussion group I have ever seen.
We are engaged in a war in which all the detailed knowledge in the world won’t win. Pain and Simmons talked about knowledge versus wisdom. They concluded that our definition of Wisdom has nothing to do with the accepted version, which consists ENTIRELY of trying to impress people.
It occurs to me that one never grows up unless he goes through the Porch Talk phase.
A small child wants ANSWERS. He needs discipline and adults who ACT adult. But there comes a time when he begins to have to make his own decisions. As he gets into his teens he needs adults who will help HIM become adult. That means that the adult must stop dictating truth and begin to explain to the teen how he must begin to deal with a LACK of information.
In our society, that time never comes. I remember when I took some grad courses in 1992 I was amazed to see grad students sitting around CRAMMING for the exam. They were doing exactly what they had done during twelve years of grammar school and high school and four ears of college. The professor had done what the grammar school teacher does with pre-teens, putting together an exam to see if the kids could repeat what at they had heard.
I have said that a high-level executive should not HAVE a job description. He MAKES job descriptions. By the same token, no professor is ready to conduct a seminar if he must give an examination at the end of it. If fifty hours of open discussion can’t tell him how well a student is doing, he should go back to teaching grammar school.
What do you MEAN by wisdom? There is the type of wisdom which is just unsubstatiated assertations of truth, but there is also wisdom, as in the ability to use knowledge. Knowledge, like IQ doesn’t go far unless one has the ability to use it effectively.
Socrates said “I know that I don’t know”, which is something that describes a white way of thinking, an admission that there is more to learn, that we DON’T KNOW enough.
But everywhere else, the ‘wise man’ is the one who knows a lot of facts. He has a lot of knowledge, and that knowledge is passed on word for word, as if an heirloom. The ‘wise man’ doesn’t say he doesn’t know, he KNOWS and teaches what he knows. One does not need to think to do this.
But Aristotle, Socrates and Plato gave tools to obtain knowledge, to analyse information. A means of understanding, and it is this desire to understand which has driven the west.
When I hear the dedicated few speak, I simply cannot understand why there aren’t more people who believe as deeply as they do and, listening to them, are not inspired enough to similarly dedicate their lives to the cause.
There are many people who strongly sympathize with the cause but there is an underlying feeling that these views are just a reactionary view to an ever-changing world, a world that will find a way to survive and thrive in new circumstances that we cannot even imagine (At least this is recognized here with genetic engineering). The result of this feeling is that despite knowledge of issues and immersion into this subculture, there is still a lingering doubt. (I believe this is why WOL focuses on HOW rather than WHAT to think).
I also believe that a sense of doubt is normal, because most of us are human, after all. We cannot take countless people screaming at us, arguing against us and naming us an evil warned of by the Bible while remaining so steadfastly committed.
I haven’t got a clue what makes someone so sure that they KNOW and are bold enough to desire to and change the world and are unshakable enough to pursue it fully. To call that ‘chutzpah’ is an understatement.
People in this camp are followers at best and I don’t think that followers can be converted into leaders. Bob noted recently that leadership training is an oxymoron. I would say it’s a waste of time an energy to try to persuade them. Alchemy may be a more fruitful pursuit.
Aldous Huxley used to say, “If you want to solve your problems, learn a new way seeing”.
It is a heroic thing to attempt to throw off a governmentally established religion. Accordingly, BWs phrase, “Political Correctness is a Religion” is not a slogan.
There has never been a governmentally sponsored religion more widely and globally established than the religion of Political Correctness.
The fingers of PC’s scope are panoramic, yet also concentrate right down to the microscopic, a flow tide of awesomely subtle influences, deliberately propagated, multi-faceted and robust, legally, ideologically, and spiritually. Political Correctness is as thoroughgoing an established religion as there ever was in all of history.
Popes, Pastors, and Imams should eat their hearts out, there is not an “official religion” recognized today that even remotely compares to the influence and scope of the world’s premiere established religion of Political Correctness (established by almost every government in every country on earth).
Yet this religion is vulnerable, as enormous, pervasive, and well-supported as it is.
The knowledge of one man can take it down.
Words are first and foremost lies. Yet true words, properly arranged and chosen, coming from even one man, can change everything. This is the contradiction of Wordism.
The trick is to convey this unsettling knowledge, to convey its truth. That is the work of “poets” (”poets” in the broad sense of a persons skilled in the arts of influence).
The “poet’s” job is to make accessible what otherwise would not be accessible. And important knowledge does get conveyed. It finds ways to make itself accessible. Its very importance drives it. Persons skilled in the arts of influence find it. Steadily but surely it makes its way into the culture.
That is what BUGS is really about, enlightenment for “poets”, seeding the culture. That is why physical (racial) separation doesn’t matter. Separation is a tactic that is beside the point.
The point is taking down the established religion of Political Correctness, a heroic undertaking.
In that we save our race.