Mantra thinking involves constant attention to Dave’s advice below. For example, when someone tries to answer the Mantra with something about how the white race invaded non-white countries, I just say:
“You are JUSTIFYING genocide.”
And that’s A LOT.
Sometimes the period is the most important part of sentence.
We are trying to make ONE point. We are not arguing religion versus atheism, the South versus the North, the Right versus the Left, we are adamant on only one point: Genocide.
The good thing about BUGS is that our people take criticism from the rest of us on this point. Lord Nelson was doing a great job on Stormfront of hammering at the Mantra. Then I noticed a change. He began to say that he was arguing that the white race shouldn’t be overwhelmed in its own land.
I pointed out to him that this was a whole different subject. We are not talking about power here, we are talking about SURVIVAL. He got it INSTANTLY. Most other people would say, “Well, it means more or less the same thing…” or something.
No way Lord Nelson would do that, because we have our DISCIPLINE here. LN instantly saw that he had gone to the “overwhelmed” bit because it was easier.
He did not have to criticize intermarriage. Immigration is easy. It is intermarriage where the establishment pulls out its straight razors. So it is infinitely easier to talk about voting blocks, busing, affirmative action, immigration, national birth rates, ANYTHING besides the one thing everybody has in mind. It is so easy to do this that LN reacted to my alert the way a person in a hypnotic trance wakes up at the edge of a cliff: “Of COURSE!”
Dave says to make the statement and leave. This reminds me of World War II pilots who flew in Korea. They were fully trained for flying jets, but the old experience came back when they got into combat. They tried to stay on the enemy’s tail the way they did when they had propellers.
I don’t understand the technical side of it, but when a pilot tries to stay on a MIGs tail, he ends up spinning out, often into unconsciousness.
A commenter actually BUILDS small airplanes, so I am a little nervous about expanding on this. I do know that the difference between fighting jets and props was that in a prop the whole idea was to get on the enemy’s tail and STAY there. In a jet one had to get the enemy in his sights and fire, from any direction. You fired a blast an then went on by. Because of the GI Bill I knew a number of guys in college who had fought in the air in both wars, and they had automatically gone back to the old on-the-tail mode when the actual fight started in Korea.
What they described to me was often what would be called ten years later as “a psychedelic experience.” In the jet they were suddenly totally disoriented and spinning, the blood in their heads making them half unconscious and half wildly drunk.
But the point is, the MIG survived. And the ones who talked to me survived. I assume that if you were a dizzy combat pilot you did not survive to take your Korean GI benefits. I assume that a lot of pilots who were half unconscious and half drunk in the vicinity of a MIG didn’t make it.
Not to overdo the comparison, we get some chances to make our point, to fire a blast. Our natural tendency is to hang on, to throw in everything we believe in.
And very often, when we knock them back a bit with the Mantra, we may be tempted to make them good Christians, or good atheists, or to accept evolution or antievolution or, as in LN’s case, to talk about being numerically overwhelmed.
1) Blast ‘em
2) Fly out of range and get ‘em in your sights again for another short blast of the same kind.
Otherwise you end up with a mind that is half unconscious and half drunk.
Like a respectable conservative.