Institutions are another aspect of Wordism.

What happened to the hundreds of thousands of monks who sang their lives out in isolated monasteries? They gave their genes to a Wordist institution which demanded human sacrifice, a human sacrifice never mentioned in the Old Testament or in the words of Jesus.

If Jesus meant to condemn all human reproduction instead of adultery, he could have said so. Which is why I am SO careful to describe Medieval Judeo-Christianity as “a Wordist institution built on the name of Jesus.

Buddha was a thoroughgoing atheist. His rejection of the gods of Hinduism was one of the major breaks between him and the Hinduism which stands in relation to Buddhism much as Judaism does to Christianity. It’s really Hindo-Buddhism, I guess.

Buddha, like Saint Peter, was married and had a child. But the popes claim descent from Peter and are forbidden to marry. They STILL say that all sex is sinful. The Catholic Bible says that “a bishop shall have one wife.” Both the Orthodox and Catholic churches which use this version of the Bible say that means a bishop shall have no wife. Orthodox priests can marry, but not bishops.

Meanwhile millions of Buddhist monks have died without issue

The obsession with sterility in Catholicism comes from Zoroastrianism in its degenerate form. The Buddhist monks seem to have a similar weird interpretation of Hindo-Buddhism, also of Aryan derivation.

Unlike the Orient, which seems to roll on no matter how miserable life gets, Aryan religion addresses the question of the meaning of life itself. In their degenerate phases, Aryan religion seems to give up and worship death, which is the danger of asking that fundamental question.

Political Correctness may be a third in this series of Aryan religious degeneration.

This would make Political Correctness not something that is new and only fails by attacking traditional values, but something very old and diseased. The suicidal demands of PC are the same as those of the Catholic Church Political Correctness hates so much. Anti-Catholicism has been described for two centuries as “The Anti-Semitism of the Intellectuals.”

The disease is survivable, but it is important to know what one is dealing with.
This is a picture of Political Correctness the professors would NOT like.

I didn’t get much out of the comments which were nominally made on the evolution of institutions.

Nothing new. Some rehashes on economics and Simmons [mderpelding] had his usual irritated statements, this time about how he was working class and I was claiming to be savior of the working class and working class doesn’t understand isms.

Everything was a rehash.

When it comes to institutions we are back where gravity was before Newton and supply and demand was before Adam Smith. Everybody knows it’s there but nobody THINKS it out.

It took us until the nineteenth century to stop thinking about Galen’s Humors and to START seeing microbes, thought the germ theory was common in Germany centuries before. Those tiny things digest our food and cause our plagues.

We all know there are institutions which have lives independent of human beings and which to a large extent determine our destinies. What does that have to do with what the average Southie is thinking about? That is as deep as the analysis gets.

There are symbiotic parasites and there are more parasites that are only costly to the hosts.
When you swallow food, you drop it directly on tops of hundreds of strains of bacteria which have been harnessed by the body to help digest it.

Every one of those strains represents a tragedy that happened to your ancestors. Each strain came in as a pure parasite. They evolved and your ancestors evolved. The bacilli evolved because they were killing their hosts, and parasites in a dead host die. We evolved because those who could not survive them died.

In the end, the hosts and the parasites which found way to be symbiotic survived.
The Shakers, as you know, were a religious sect which took the St. Paul – Zoroastrian version of Christianity to its logical extreme. They made beautiful furniture and you can take a tour of where the Shakers USED to live.

The Shaker institution killed its hosts.

So did the Shakers’ legitimate ancestors, the Zoroastrians. Z discovered what all institutions that have a huge priesthood to feed discover: You can get a major increase in paying members if you let EVERYBODY in. In the long run, Z killed its racial base and died. But priests and professors don’t CARE about the long run. They become parasites, pure and simple.

Peter and Paul the Tentmaker earned their own livings.

One thing I want everyone to understand is that I am absolutely serious about this being a GRADUATE SEMINAR. Under our present system, there are no graduates and there are no seminars.

“Seminars” today are extensions of first-grade classes: Memorize and repeat.

To the extent there is discussion, you are graded on how you have learned to repeat the Party Line. You also have an examination at the end so that you will cough up what you are supposed to have learned, as in grammar school.

This is a SEMINAR. No exam. And I demand you come up with something on your own.

You are being prepared for postgraduate WORK, which means you go out into the world on a mission and you use me to learn how to do it.

HOW to do it. Not WHAT to do. Pain will be out there more capable of spreading his Protestant Christian world view. Backbaygrouch will learn to expand on his Catholic viewpoint. Others will go out and extend their atheistic approach.

You will go our well aware of the weaknesses and artificialities in your approach. You will carry heresy back with you. There is not and never has been a way of thinking that doesn’t need basic, hard rethinking. True Believers who have not been HERE will be offended and shocked.

But any point of view which is not regularly shocked in this way dies.

Dave talks about professional standards. That is what you are here to develop.

Zoroastrianism today is claimed by a couple of tiny groups in India and Iraq. They are colored people the original Zoroastrians would have rejected as non-Aryans. The original Olympic oath required one to swear that “I am of pure Hellenic blood…”

One of the least-noticed phenomena today is the steady dying off of the mainline Protestant denominations. If you do not want your world view to become a dead end, you have to take a brutally new view of it.

Naturally I mention religion here because THOSE outlooks are more definable. What I say is true of ALL world views. If you diddle along like mainline Protestantism, going along with every latest fad of social thought, you are heading for a dead end, which means everything you have thought of will be a complete waste.

As Shari remembered, the last Zoroastrian Shah was a mulatto. The degenerate Persian Empire by then was a house of cards waiting for any wind to knock it over.

I have pointed out repeatedly that the mental rot that was Zoroastrianism after twelve centuries poisoned Christian thought and twisted it into self-hatred and sterility. At the time of the Gospels, Z had degenerated into the Political Correctness of its time, a construct of “intellectuals” who listened only to each other.

After all this time in BUGS, you should have deduced that for YOURSELF.

Dave says I am UNIQUELY qualified. In fact, that is why you are here. If Dave did NOT think I am UNIQUELY qualified, he wouldn’t BE here, and neither would you. I spent my life getting these qualifications, and I, too, don’t want MY thinking to end up in some little colored Whitakerist dead end.

I really enjoy reading the kind of exchange Dave and mderpelding are having in the last set of comments, where they are hammering out BASICS with EACH OTHER.

As I keep repeating, there is all the difference in the world in things that would go utterly unnoticed in today’s Kindergarten “seminar.” In a Kindergarten seminar, people will say “X said …” as a matter of AUTHORITY. No one does that with “Bob” here. No one says, “You can’t say that, because BOB said…”
What is important is that it would never OCCUR to you to do that. You may say, “Bob made this point” or Shari made this point,” but only because it is a USEFUL approach to reality. Today’s “seminars” are full of Jesuit-like correction from the Party Line.

EVERYTHING HERE INTEERRELATES. The particular view of Zoroastrianism I give here relates in a way most of you did not say, and may not have thought of.

In short, you must step back and ruthlessly reevaluate your point of view, or your point of view will die.

I found BWs interview with Peter Shank fascinating, not because of what BW had to say, I already know BWs thought, but because it exemplified so much of what BUGS is really all about.

BW refers to himself as a heretic, but that is just his way of expressing his refusal to climb down from top-drawer professional standards. That’s all professionalism really is, adherence to standards. Certain personalities refuse to climb down and submit to organizational pressures regarding professional standards. BW is not alone in this.

Peter, on the other hand, is motivated by a desire to procure justice. That is why he puts an image of the flaming and crumbling Word Trade Center towers on his site. But Peter is like so many of us. We talk about war, but don’t know war. There is no justice in war. The procurement of justice can never be achieved through war. Peter doesn’t know this.

But what I hope Peter does know is that Robert Whitaker is the only man in the world who possesses are accurate assessment of the climate of the battle against the white race. Robert Whitaker alone possesses the only accurate assessment.

BUGS is about this assessment.

An accurate assessment of the climate of battle is a prerequisite to the discovery of new and more effective forms of maneuver, preceding any real hope of finding successful methods against the enemy.

This assessment constitutes Robert Whitaker’s professionalism. And he and I know that the right minds will inevitably find it. That is the way life works.

I think I am the only participant in BUGS that knows this, truly appreciating the huge real world implications of Robert Whitaker’s work.

I know the real talents, the real minds, will find Robert Whitaker’s assessment. It is inevitable.

– Dave

They loved it, of course.

http://vornetwork.com/_archive/PS_20080723_Whitaker.mp3 
Bob Whitaker on ShankTalk Worldwide July 23rd — 57MB

A few quick comments:

Peter is as good as it gets in doing straight-up interviews – it is his forte, and he is without peer in this.

You and Peter have something in common – both of you do not work well with digital technology. I think it might be best to do this on a straight POTS (Plain Old Telephone Service) phone line – no SKYPE, nothing special.

It would be run over several nights – indeed, my choice for Peter has always been to do a lot of the material that does not require real-time operations to do them, and clean them up, and then upload them as mp3’s.

VOR has had problems with mp3’s until recently, putting them up at 96 and 128 kbs quality – these are BIG damn files, and they take forever to download over dial-up, which is all many of us have access to, or can afford.

I knock the first ten minutes of Peter’s latest works off – there is too much music getting in the way of the message. He, and all too many in the Racially Conscious Community who do podcasts – came along in a time when there were long musical intros, interludes and closings on live radio. This was because the radio networks needed time to get all of the ducks in a row in all of the stations along the line.

Frank Roman, of Western Voices, does the best musical intro – no more than fifteen seconds, and the podcasters are down to five seconds – just an identifying musical intro, and that’s it.

Done over several nights would have an advantage for the two of you – people could email in (or access the website/blogsites) with intelligent, thoughtful comments, that would make later broadcasts more productive. Again, the broadcast would not go out in real time, at least for the recorded part – answers could be dealt with in a second portion, where you would not be at the mercy of the technology.

You and Peter are smart – we need much more of a focus on Quality than we have seen historically in the nascent Racially Conscious Community.

Good luck!

–AFKAN NOW

I’ll be interviewed on ShankTalk at 3 PM tomorrow July 23.

http://shankradio.com/index.html

I keep telling you the left is rigidly segregated cults all of its followers playing the trump whitey card one way or another.

This game survives because the cults are never set upon one another, but thrives on Limbaugh/jackal yipping and shrieking at some monolith known as “liberalism.”

– Simmons

“Environmentalists” have a problem of Political Correctness. I described it in my last book. It is the “trump” system that is essential to PC.

We are familiar with the PC Trump System, I just give it a name here:

Nonwhite trumps white.

Female trumps male.

Animal trumps human.

Politically, left trumps right.

Bureaucrat trumps businessman.

Foreigner trumps American.

And so forth.

The specific problem environmentalists are running into is that it is not Evil Whites who are cutting the forests and putting the orangutans and other animal out of business. It is not Evil Whites who are hunting down animals in Africa for food who were preserved under Evil White Rule.

The Holy Coloreds are driving out and killing the Holy Animals in terms of our established religion of Political Correctness.

What we see of environmentalism is the self-advertising Luddites and Modern Amish denouncing Evil White Capitalism in the West and growing organic foods. But nothing would destroy Mother Nature faster than an attempt to abandon all “artificial” agriculture and raise nothing but “natural” organic food.

The only reason the West has any forests LEFT is because we went on to coal and oil. We can AFFORD forests. The third world can’t.

When people start genetically engineering their kids, they’ll want the BEST of both parents. The first step will be gene selection, being able to choose which attributes to pass on and which ones not to pass on. This is most likely the technology that will be available first. This isn’t contrived, you’re throwing the same dice, but weighting them strongly for a particular result. People may not want chance to dictate how their kids turn out, but most will want some familiarity.

Surely some white women who have chosen a black man as a father must look at their children every now and then and just feel a little left out that they can’t see themselves in their children’s eyes.

p

Once at the Philadelphia Society, Sam Dickson was going on about the leadership of aristocrats. I stood up and pointed out that one lesson [of] the twentieth century was that ALL so-called aristocrats are a fraud. Like the self-styled Greatest Generation, they folded when challenged.

Like Jared Taylor, Sam uses his aristocratic pretensions to make his listeners feel good by having him as their leader. It’s a good tactic, and I have no argument with any good tactic. But he shouldn’t do the praise-the-aristocracy crap in a small discussion with me present.

Another loud disagreement Sam and I have is his praise of the British Monarchy.

The British Monarchy is very typical of the Greatest Generation-”aristocracy” crap. The Queen fought for the right of every third-worlder in the former British Commonwealth to come to Britain because they were all HER subjects. [S]he told the British people that it mattered where THEY were born, England belonged to everybody who had loyalty to her, because she was BORN Queen, had as much right there as the Brit peasants did.

They ate it up. The truly pathetic LOVE it when an “aristocrat” insults them.

Then there are those who are constantly repeating that all “our” problems have to do with deserting “traditional values.” This leads directly to their daughter marrying a “nice Christian Negro boy.”

OUR problems come directly from the simple fact that all OUR traditional safeguards have, when it comes to RACE, failed totally. The biggest objection conservatives have to nonwhites pouring into Europe and America is that they are not “assimilating” and marrying our daughters.

My objection to Pitt and Jolie’s nig kids is not that it is “contrived.” I am all FOR “contrived” families which consist of Indian parents wanting to have ARYAN children. I am not going to bitch about “contrived” families when the traditional family is so obviously failing us. Let’s STOP using the enemy’s code-words.

p

This is a brilliant post. Genetic engineering must result in a “contrived and artificial” family.

See how the future pokes its head up out of the ground in surprising ways?

The future is something that is stumbled into. But the unwritten rule is that the beauty and desirability of white skin is eternal. Do you really think Angelina Jolie would ever give up hers?

 

– Dave 

I think you are confusing genetic engineering with social engineering.

If you have to tell people what their nation consists of, that that said nation doesn’t exist.
Whether the south had blacks or not is about as relevant as whether Australia had aboriginals or not.

There is an unwritten and unstated but assumed rule that says that “Australian” means Anglo-Celtic or similarly ‘assimilated’ white European. As for the aboriginals, well, they’ve always been there and been part of the landscape, both literally and metaphorically. It is the anti-whites who write tomes to try and ‘prove’ otherwise, to prove that the nation is multiracial and one of immigrants.

Nations are BORN through natural progression and it is this natural progression which defines it.

Artificial multiracial states are carefully handcrafted and legislated, like Angeline Jolies family. All families have people who immigrated into it, so why is hers so artificial and contrived?

– Prometheus

An interesting aside:

On the idea that the South was not a nation because of its slaves, I remember a short quote in the Saturday Evening Post when I was about twelve. The quote was given and the reader was challenged to guess who said it.

The year was 1848. The hero of the moment was Kossuth, a Hungarian who was leading a demand for self-rule for Hungary, then past of the Austrian Empire. One of the major arguments against Kossuth was that the majority of the people in the area designated as “Hungary” were NOT Hungarians. Kossuth quite specifically demanded that HUNGARIAN rule it.

A member stood up on the Floor of Congress and made an impassioned speech in favor of the Hungarian claim. He specifically said that Hungarians were fighting the central authority of Vienna, and SINCE THEY WERE THE REAL CONTROLLING GROUP IN HUNGARY, they should have full US backing.

You have probably guessed that the congressman in question was Abraham Lincoln.

Bob had a question in his reply, and I’d like to take a shot at addressing it.

Bob wrote:

His second point is harder to dismiss so easily. Blacks were not considered PART of the Southern Nation, but the Southern Nation’s “way of life” depended on blacks. I am still mulling over that one.

In reply:

I suspect “the Southern Nation’s ‘way of life’” was based on a feudal social order, and a feudal economic system.

The average White Man in the South actually outnumbered the slaves, and had it worse than the slaves. After all, they had no “right” to protection, as the feudal Lords OWED those who were in fealty to them.

So, the Southern Nation – essentially, the transplanted Elite of London, many of whom journeyed to London annually – remained a feudal social order, and those who favored the War of the Northern Aggression looked at the black slaves as luxuries that were in the way of their imposition of an Industrial Age sensibility on a feudal, agrarian social order.

Ironically, Lincoln’s (Prussian!) policies – redemption of the slaves with money from the sale of Western lands, and their shipment back to Africa – would have worked in the South’s interests far more than Calhoun could ever have imagined.

                 — AFKAN

 Mderpelding has an interesting comment about how the South was NOT a nation, since it was multicultural and biracial.

It is good point, but it has a fatal flaw. Saying a nation is multicultural is like saying that America is “a nation of immigrants.” The fatal flaw is that ALL nations are nations of immigrants. All nations have multicultural ROOTS.

His second point is harder to dismiss so easily. Blacks were not considered PART of the Southern Nation, but the Southern Nation’s “way of life” depended on blacks. I am still mulling over that one.

While I am mulling that, there is a point here I want to address.

The point I made in “Defeatism is the ONLY Enemy was based on a discussion I had before of the book War Through the Ages. When I first wrote it, no one had any comment on it.

Another thing I have written about that got no relevant comments was the TRUE arithmetic of America’s population.

Forty years ago Eric Hoffer kept pointing out that the East Coast in America is simply Europeans living abroad.
Today, if there is a diffrerence between Blue State editorials and those in Paris, I haven’t seen it.

I have pointed out that the Puritans were AmericaEnglandBritain, where they lived in exclusive communities and set up the SAME isolated communities here.. The left’s first resident aliens. They never left

No one gets the point. “Nation” is related to the word “birth.” New England was born in a European religious community. It is now dominated by people who were born in European ETHNIC communities. The difference is that the latter contain a lot of people who want to be AMERICANS and not New Englanders.

There has always been a natural alliance between white “ethnics” and the South. Our common enemy has been the New England myth that they ARE America.

New EnglandAmerica, and that no one was here before the Mayflower, thinks it IS.

Red Staters do not see this. They keep trying to trace their attitudes back to the Old Testament, the way the Pilgrim father myth of New England taught them to do.

Which leads to another continuing theme here some people probably think is irrelevant. Red StateAmerica is doing exactly what the equally successful respectable right is doing. It is framing its entire self-image on the ENEMY’S terms.

Everything here interrelates. I do short pieces and hope YOU will tie them together FOR me. AmericanRedState is not Judeo-Christian; it is a matter of population, REAL population.

America was NOT founded by immigrants. As I KEEP pointing out, at the time of the American Revolution there was a higher proportion of NATIVE BORN white Americans than any time before or since.

This is not a useless statistics. This goes the basis of the word “nation.” The last, and smallest, wave of IMMIGRATION to America before 1776 ENDED over fifty years before..: When that last wave BEGAN, it was ALREADY true that most Americans descended from GRANDPARENTS who were BORN here.

As Adam Smith pointed out in the Wealth of Nations in 1776, the American population in his time and before was doubling NATURALLY ever twenty to twenty-five years. No country has been more contrary to the nation of immigrants myth than America, simply because of geometric progression.

Not Judeo-Christian Culture, GEOMETRIC PROGRESSION.

We were BORN here. That’s what the word “nacio” MEANS.

Lee was CONVINCED he was defeated, so he surrendered. At Appomattox a
brigadier general from South Carolina (where else?) told Lee that, instead of surrendering, what was left of the Confederate Army should drop what few weapons it had left and run for the mountains for a guerrilla war.

He said Lee should advise other Southerners to continue the resistance.

Lee ignored this fanatic.

Under the Union government he accepted by his surrender, Lee had no more freedom of speech than we have today. His citizenship was taken away and he had to be silent about everything he really thought to stay in the US.

But it is clear that he regretted his decision on April 9, 1865 to the end of his days.

Let us go back to the theme I set out in “Defeatism is the ONLY Enemy.” Lee decided he had lost a war, fair and square.

Which means he never saw the South as a NATION.

Nations NEVER surrender.

In the oceans of ink spilled over the Civil War, a major portion is criticism of Jefferson Davis for always appointing Lee as Commander and Chief subject to himself. Only in the final emergency did Davis give Lee full powers as Commander in Chief.

Lee did only one thing with that total command, and he regretted it until his dying day. Lee not only did not allow his forces to head for the hills, but he surrendered ALL Confederate forces everywhere.

Which left the South totally at the mercy and good will of the North.

Fifty years before Lee made his one Great Political Decision, Russia made the opposite one.

Napoleon had conquered Moscow, Russia’s Richmond. Napoleon had defeated every Russian army and Russia was simply prostrate. But Russia was a NATION.

Lee ordered every Southerner to accept that the South was not a nation.

We were a movement that had lost fair and square.

Could the North have done all that to us if we had had a military core as guerrilla force in the mountains? Could the North have done all that to us if each army had to decide for itself what to do next?

The Union Army occupied the South in exactly the same way that Napoleon occupied Russia in 1812 and Britain occupied America in 1780. Napoleon occupied the land his army STOOD on. Britain occupied the part of America it STOOD on. Yankee armies occupied the Southern land they STOOD on.

The one difference was that Lee SURRENDERED.

Nations NEVER surrender

And this is why it is so important to propagate to whites the fact that our claims are perfected claims (a real and genuine undiluted property right), the opposite that Political Correctness teaches.

History does not repeat. The specialization that exists today is many orders greater than it was even 30 years ago, all due to the genetically endowed creativity and genius of the white race.

This has created manifold new opportunities for nonwhites to earn a living and make their way in the world. But nonwhite claims are unperfected because those opportunities are an unearned benefit conferred to them by the white race.

A claim upon unearned benefits is fine, just as long it is acknowledged they are unearned.

But to say their unearned claims are perfected, the way Political Correctness does, is a BIG LIE. And BIG LIES equal tyranny.

John McCain is every inch the nigger that Obama is. That’s because he fails to stand against the BIG LIE. Proof of these is his support for carbon credits crowd, who are using the delusional millennialism of the global warming Chicken Little’s to defraud us and steal our earnings and our property.

The real issue is freedom. And the matter of the perfection of our claims is not subject to debate no more than the premise that the sun will always rise in the east is subject to debate. That’s because our claim follows an inheritance that is rightfully OUR property. There is no hole you can crawl through to evade this and any attempt at evasion is an attempt to fashion new clothes for the BIG LIE.

Our superior claim does not follow any form of Wordism that licenses abuse of the rights of other races (the way Nazism did).That is not the issue. The issue is OUR inheritance and OUR property. What rightfully belongs to us because WE earned it.

Once white people get this through their heads, defeatism disappears and whites recover their bearing. I’m pretty sure this is happening right now.

By the way, I just loved BW’s comment, “Lady Bountiful is over! Everything that can be given away has been given away.”

That’s perfect. That states the issue perfectly.

== Dave

I have said before that as a teenager I read the official West Point history of Warfare. War Through the Ages, a number of times. It was a thousand pages long. It emphasized EXACTLY the point that the Greatest Generation ignored.

You see, the self-styled Greatest Generation wanted to show how TOUGH they were. To be frank, I have known a lot of people who fought on about every side and on every front in World War II, and every single non-American said Americans were the worst troops in it, save maybe the Italians.

Those who adopted War Through the Ages back then were not trying to prove how tough they were. They were pros and knew it.

War Through the Ages emphasized REAL morale. That is, the book described each battle in detail, but it had one theme: having the biggest army is the same as having good propaganda. Alexander the Great was routinely outnumbered umpteen to one AND THE ARMY THAT BROKE AND RAN BEOFRE HIM STILL OUTNUMBERED HIM UMPTEEN TO ONE.

Also, War Through the Ages did NOT say the members of the giant armies that broke and ran on so many battles were made up of wimps or novices. That is Greatest Generation crap.

So how did Alexander and Robert E. Lee and Napoleon get superior forces to fall apart in front of them?

There were about as many of the enemy when they ran away as when the battle began. There was ONE difference and one difference ONLY. The army that ran was CONVINCED IT HAD LOST.

That was ALL.

That is why “Power comes from the barrel of a gun!!!” is such a silly statement. In many a battle, the losing side came and ran with more gun barrels.

The ONLY job of the enemy, with or without guns, is to convince us we are defeated. Those who try to convince us we are defeated, by any means, anywhere, is the enemy.

Speaking of the defeatist semi-respectables at Chronicles one of them is carping on the Bolsheviks as they move against their right. I try to stem the tide of profundity with this simple reposte. http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/?p=669#comments

– Simmons

In 1928, less than five years before it took power, the German National Socialist Party got less than one percent of the total vote in the national election for the Reichstag. Hitler was so little known that the foreign press kept referring to Hitler as a “monarchist.”

In fact, AFTER THE ELECTION OF 1932, when the NSDAP had a solid plurality and it and the Communists combined held a majority, meaning one of them HAD to be let into the Government, Time magazine declared that all the experts agreed that the one thing that was certain was that the Kaiser would be restored to power.

This blindness was not limited to the United States. The reason they said it was because Belgium had protested the restoration of the Kaiser that never happened and was not ABOUT to happen.

I KEEP repeating that Mussolini almost missed the March on Rome. Nobody had less idea than he did that he was about to take over Italy.

I KEEP repeating that the lesson of the Perot Phenomenon of 1992 was NOT that Perot had big ears or that he was a loon. In weeks, he went from an announcement that he was willing to run for the presidency to a solid plurality against the other two candidates, including a sitting president.

Perot was less to believe it than Mussolini was.

So all we ever hear is “All is LOST!” because we are not making steady headway that people can SEE. They point to the heavy financing of the left in America and its visibility.

So let’s take a look at the history of far left side. The Communist Party is the most consistent “also-ran” in history. For decades, before and after WWII, it consistently outpolled almost every other party in France and Italy. It KEPT a quarter to a third of the vote in many countries.

Communists controlled the unions. Communists controlled the movie industry OPENLY in Europe, while its control here was an open secret. They had enough power it the media to keep it under wraps during the McCarthy Era.

No one talks about how powerful the Communist Party was in 1932 Germany. At that time, the workers and the union vote was considered the way we now look at minorities, a solid block for the Reds.

History says that our kin d of movement is NEVER big until it suddenly explodes into power. History says that our kind of movement NEVER takes power unless the other side is growing and looking inevitable.

Nobody had any idea who Hitler and Mussolini WERE until they were suddenly absolute rulers.

Don’t tell me “Allis Lost!” Don’t tell me “All is WON!”

Read some HISTORY, for God’s sake!

ZPG is a very small cult of useful idiots about to be turned into useless idiots. Not 1 in a 100 democrats will claim to have any affinity for them.

Let me critique you on this one you are seeing the Left here as a monolith like Limbaugh does and why he has leveled off in effectiveness. The effective lion pride singles out its target, Limbaugh is a Jackal who yips at the whole herd expecting them at any moment to fall down and die for him.

Divide and conquer, and what I mean by that is that right wing rhetoric should always accentuate the fringeness, smallness and divisiveness of each of the left’s cults. You might have added into your informative post those above qualities of ZPG. Imagine telling 80IQ Yolanda to stop producing carbon copies (pun intended).

Good strategic observation from a voice of actual experience.

The Carbon Count is the amount of carbon each human leaves in the world. We are being urged to look up our Carbon Count on the internet and try to minimize it. You cannot eliminate it except by committing suicide. Your job is to minimize this evil. The last thing you should do is have children.

No one seems to notice how traditional this train of thought is. Like Marxism, environmentalism claims to be new but it really just a bastard child of the worst part of Judeo-Christianity:

“Where every prospect pleases and only man is vile.”

No one but me has a memory, but I saw all this in the 1970s. In the thinking that led to the movie Soylent Green, a 1972 hit, Zero Population Growth (ZPG) was the semi-ideal. The ideal was Bob Barker, one of the better-known names of the 1970s. Barker said his wife had made him Socially Aware, so he had himself sterilized and dedicated his life to taking in stray animals.

Let me add the ritual statement: No, I am not joking. No, I am not exaggerating. This was seen as not only sane, but the Highest Form of Idealism at the time.

Barker went on to the next logical step of dedicating himself to the sterilization of animals.

Our Victorian heritage gives us the impression that chastity had to do only with the morality of young women. This was a complete distortion of the basis of chastity as Gnostic Judeo-Christianity saw it.

Let me repeat that there is not one single word advocating total sexual abstinence in the Old Testament. “Be fruitful and multiply” is as close as it comes. Both the Ten Commandments and Jesus condemned only ADULTERY.

If anyone confuses all sex with adultery, he needs a dictionary or medication.

The Gnostics insisted that all things of THIS WORLD were evil. The first temptation Satan offered Jesus was “all the kingdoms of the world.” It never occurred to anybody that Satan did not have them to give.

Origen tried the surgical method of ending human life on this earth, The Bob Barker Method, but the Church rejected him for it. Human sacrifice was out. It was prohibited both by the Roman Empire and by the story of Jacob and Esau.

All that was left was total abstinence from sex, which St. Paul DID say was the ideal. He said it would be better if Christians were totally abstinent, as he was, but “It is better to marry than to burn.”

I know people have objected to my saying this, but “It is better to marry than to burn” is NOT a ringing endorsement of marriage.

What is interesting about the radicals, Marxist and environmentalist, is how CONSERVATIVE they are. Marx offered the same inevitable Judgment Day we have been faced with for two thousand years. Bob Barker’s ZPG and environmentalism say all human life is vile.

In the new 2008 version, the Carbon Count says all human life is evil.

Three thousand years ago Zoroaster said the God of This World was Evil, the God of the Next World was good. THAT, not the Old Testament, was where ending all life as an ideal came from, and that was a distortion of what even Zoroaster himself went on to say.

I am not at all sure that Zoroaster wasn’t repeating something someone said a thousand years before HIM. Bit I AM sure that none of this is new.