Hello

I wrote an article with some good help from Lord Nelson.

I would very much appreciate some comments.

Anti-racist, or anti-white?

We have all heard politicians talk about diversity, tolerance, understanding, multiculture, immigration, integration, assimilation, the melting pot and so on. What do they mean by this? And what is their long term goal?

In this article we shall expose the real goal of anti-racists, and prove that they are in reality simply anti-white. Their goal and their mentality can best be described by the Harvard professor Noel Ignatiev in his article: “Abolish the White Race.”

“The goal of abolishing the white race is on its face so desirable that some may find it hard to believe that it could incur any opposition other than from committed white supremacists.”

Hardly any anti-racist will admit their goal as clearly as professor Ignatiev. Anti-racists will not call themselves race traitors or anti-white, nor will they call white genocide their goal. Instead of saying it directly, they will just call themselves anti-racist and then argue for “a melting pot” where all will be mixed and become brown.

This goal of abolishing the white race can be divided up into four basic stages:

1. The demonization of whites. Another term for this is what is often referred to as “White Guilt.”
2. Third world immigration into all white countries and only into white countries.
3. Forced integration as the first step towards assimilation. Assimilation is not directly forced but everybody who opposes it is condemned for being racist.
4. Anyone who speaks out against any part of the process of White genocide will be denounced as a ‘Racist’, ‘White Supremacist’ or a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.

The demonization of whites, i.e. the white guilt complex, makes white people accept non-white immigration, integration and assimilation which will lead towards the melting pot where all formerly white countries will be brown, and thus the white race will become extinct.

Let us now take a look at the arguments that the so called anti-racists use.

Why must white countries have immigration?

Let us start with the USA. A commonly used argument for why America must accept immigration is because white people took the land away from the native-Americans. If that really was the case one might start to wonder why Germany must accept immigrants. For as we all know, Germans never took their land away from Indians or any other non-white group.

Then you will notice that anti-racists change their argument. They will now talk about the evil Nazis, Holocaust and Hitler. It would be a disgrace if Germany, with their history, would discriminate and not take in non-whites; anti-racists will say.

So what about Britain and France, they never took their land from anyone nor did they support Hitler. Then you will notice that the anti-racists will change their arguments again. This time they will pretend to be objectively interested in former colonial powers taking in immigrants from the former colonies.

What about Iceland? The people on Iceland did not take the land away from anyone, they did not support Hitler nor did they have any colonies. Again the anti-racists will change their arguments in order to support immigration and say that Iceland has an ageing population and they need more workers.

If you have argued with so-called anti-racists, you will notice that they always have many arguments for why white countries must have immigration.

All of these different arguments, taken as single cases, may seem genuine. But then comes the case of Japan:

Japan was allied with Hitler, they had colonies and they also have an ageing population. But Japan does not have massive third world immigration. Do anti-racists condemn Japan, and accuse them of being a racist country? That is because anti-racists are purely anti-white, not anti-asian.

And remember! Anyone who opposes these facts is automatically accused of being a RACIST!! By so called anti-racists. Therefore, as has been demonstrated, anti-racist is just a code word for anti-white.

The white race is a social construct, but not when someone is to be blamed.

Another commonly used argument is that the white race does not exist. And therefore there is no good reason to preserve it. Who is white, the anti-whites will ask.

Anti-whites pretend to have problems with identifying who is white and who is not when they are confronted by people who want to preserve the white race. But at the same time they have no problems identifying who is white when they talk about slavery, colonization, the Holocaust, discrimination, racism and so on.

Anti-racists know, as does everybody, who is white and who is not. The reason they deny the existence of the white race is because they are justifying white genocide. And remember; nothing justifies genocide!

Genocide

Article 2 of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide from 1948 defines genocide as any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Anti-racists, as we know by now, are anti-white. They are going after all white countries and only white countries. Through their forcing of immigration, integration and assimilation into all white countries, and only white countries, they have shown their intent to destroy the white race in whole. “They are deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole.”

So remember; whatever these anti-whites come up with, whether it be lynchings of blacks in the south or the mass killing of Jews in Germany, nothing justifies what they do today which is genocide against whites. We have to begin to think in this way. Whatever has been done in the past or whatever is being done in the future, NOTHING justifies genocide against our race, the white race. Period.

What is our goal?

We who are pro-white want to preserve the white race. We believe that all races have the right to exist, including the white race. And it is usually when we say this, and include the white race, that theses people who call themselves anti-racists get mad. We are fighting for our existence, for the right to live. In the world view of an anti-white, there is simply no place for white people. In our world view there is a place for all races, including the white race.

The article below was self-pity, for which I apologize.  But I don’t go back and erase my mistakes.

I know a LOT, first-hand, about the reaction to letters or such is among the opinion professionals.  So I had a strategy in mind.  With their usual bashfulness BUGsers let me know that they have more important things to do, which is what you might call Cotton Mather-level bashfulness.

I crawled down into my foxhole and thought it over as your artillery whizzed over.

The time is likely to come when YOU have people who can do this kind of stuff, so it is worth your knowing what I have observed in terms of what I call professional opinionists.

Our idea is to get ideas into circulation.  Our estimate of the personal worth of such opinionists is beside the point.

I have worked with the Mantra for many, many years.   It is one of those things I have developed which is like a good computer virus.   Once you get it to someone’s attention, it shows up in his thought.   This does NOT mean he will be come like us.  We are free to think, he is not.

But someone who does thousands of opinion pieces needs material.   He needs a “take” on things.  In fact, that is the ONLY thing he makes his rather good living doing.   I have found things in the oddest places that could only have come from me, though you would have real trouble recognizing them in the form they show up.

So you might think I am trying to convert Pat.  No, the idea is simply to be sure he has read the Mantra itself, of which I am now sure. 

Here is the key point I am making:  The world looks different when you have to pump out hundreds of thousands of words a year on deadlines.  A lot of us enjoy a game of baseball from time to time, but the world of professional baseball is totally different.  A lot of us like giving our opinions, but doing it on schedule and for pay is different.  You put an idea in there and YOU will be ignored, but the idea is planted.

A little.

You can make a little into a lot.  You can do it later with YOUR followers.  Right now you have bigger fish to fry.

BOB!

Two points to ponder:

(1) Why is that the more radical the racist, the better he gets along with other races?

Moral: The world would be a more peaceful place were all racist.

(2) Why is is that he who was most successful at truly being the good little boy will grow up to be a bad ass?

Think of: Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson, NB Forrest, Adolf Hitler; all very good little boys, all notorious bad asses.

Bad ass: He who withstands the temptations of the a**hole, both the crook (the kick ass) and the fop (the wide ass), which everyone expects the bad ass to be and is angry that he is not.

Moral: Bad-assness is closer to godliness. John the Baptist was a bad ass: he wore a loin cloth and ate grasshoppers for supper!

Dixi.

From the master of boiling it down,
Pain

 
When I first took my job with the Reagan Administration my boss, a professor, had heard that I was known to be genius at finding things out.  But on Capitol Hill I had worked closely with the Congressional Research Service, so he decided to test me.  He said he was making a speech and he needed the name of one of the three witches in Richard III.

He thought that would really show me how hard he was to work for or something.  Maybe he had done crap like that with students.  I came back a couple of hours later and said told him Shakespeare didn’t give the name. 

He was surprised since he thought I would be going out and looking up Shakespeare.   He asked me how I did it.  I said, “I called the public library reference.”

Hew never accomplished a single thing as head of OPM except blocking me from putting our people in civil service jobs.  Every Administration does that to have its sources of information inside government in the future, but not him. 

He did accomplish one unique thing.  When a party is overwhelmingly reelected as Republicans were in 1984 and controls the Senate, it is simply unknown for the President to nominate one of his Administrations for reappointment and for them to be rejected in the Senate.  My boss got rid of me and did some silly ass stuff during the interim after the election, and the Senate turned him down.  I would have warned him against it, Justas I kept advising him to get our people into the permanent civil service, but he liked yes men and nothing else.

A lot of people feel we should make Buchanan aware of the Mantra, so Bob should do it.  You can find Buchanan’s address by calling public library reference.  My printer does not work, and I am tired of buying new ones. 

It would be SO nice if one or more of you would get his address and send the Mantra to him.   If several of you did it, he would see the repetition and READ it. Carefully.

Now that I really am getting old and tired, the one thing that gives a boost is when my tech team or Lord Nelson or somebody takes INITIATIVE and just flat DOES it.

I am tired of putting my own BUGS stuff in SF.   If it is something SF should see, why can’t somebody else in BUGS PUT it there?  That is SO much better than me tooting my own horn, especially SINCE I AM THE ONLY ONE WHO TOOTS IT.

That looks BAD.

Give the old man a break.  Grab his flag and run with it.