Archive for January, 2010
Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white. Conservatives insist they are anti-racist, but everything they get paid to bitch about is a direct result of that anti-white program.
The most basic drive is not money and it is not power and it is not being a Tough Guy from World Wart II. Every drunk will shout to you that money is everything. I have listened to people tell me for fifty years that their heroism is everything.
But the only REAL imperative is producing offspring that look like oneself. Long before World War II billions of animals gave their lives to save their group. Every social animal will make sacrifices so that their GROUP will live and go on.
What does it do to a social animal if there is a massive social engineering program to cut out this instinct?
Of course no one likes to call the drive to convince whites to do themselves in “social engineering.” But what else COULD you call it? No one else calls it that because the very term exposes the problem. The term “social engineering” is not popular because it brings up the question of what ELSE is affected.
Any time you use the term “social engineering” it strips naked the POWER question involved. Anti-whites hide behind the mantel of Idealism. But ALL social engineering sees itself as idealistic.
The term is unpopular because people immediately ask:
1) “Who does this give power to?”
2) Who decides what is good for us? And
3) If you interfere with people’s instincts in one area, what affect does this have on the rest of their minds?
None of these questions arises in regard to anti-whites.
Not only is getting rid of whites social engineering, it is social engineering on the most basic instinct of all.
Every social animal protects its borders. But we cannot protect our borders because there is no we. It becomes a random selection of Hispanics being kept out by a random selection of Hispanics in the border patrol. We do not have what every other social animals has had for a hundred million years: a gene pool to be protected.
Secondly, every nation is an accumulation of its individuals, as in we the people of the United States of America and OUR posterity. The Constitution no longer holds. You simply cannot have a multiracial, multicultural state and refer to ourselves and OUR posterity at the same time. We have gone from a contract where people give up certain powers to a propositional state.
In a propositional state, all power goes to whoever INTERPRETS the Proposition. The Judiciary is to be obeyed by all, because it has taken the place of the balance of powers. The President could say in his oath of office, “I swear to uphold and defend the latest opinion of a majority of the Supreme Court.” That is what he does. The old document is not what he upholds and defends.
All of this flows naturally from anti-white social engineering. Conservatives bitch about the symptoms but they shriek at all heretics and demand the right to lead the lynch mob.
This may be a problem only for me, since I was not raised in the computer age and simply don’t have the energy any more to do real search.
I know our commenters look for our ideas reflected in other locations because you are constantly sending me links. But for Old Bob, these links fall into two categories:
1) Place where the Mantra Thinking has been cut out; and
2) Places where I can’t FIND the section referred to.
The first one demonstrates as nothing else could my point about respectable conservatism. Right-wing blogs which are not specifically pro-white will remove whole pages to get rid of the Mantra and show they are not doing just that. That happens all the time.
But there are pages which are still there and a commenter gives the link only. But no such pages are devoted only and entirely to the one comment referred to. Is it the Mantra which we might look for or is a use of the Mantra? I don’t know about you, but I would have to read fifty entries to find what has been referred to, and even then it could have been removed AND the commenter was not specific about what I am looking for.
Since this is very important to us, commenters will have to be far, far more specific about how to find them than just giving a link.
BoardAd has trouble with this link-only business. But he has a solution.
It’s called copy and paste.
When BoardAd gives me a link, he COPIES the specific thing he is referring to. That takes a few seconds. Then he puts in the words he is referring to and THEN puts the link below it. I want the quote itself, and there is no reason in our age for me to have to look it up. But I also want the CONTEXT, what is the nature of the blog or other place where this is quoted?
Giving only a link is OUTDATED, like referring to a tome.
This is easy, and it would put an end to our present endless frustration.
One of the things that is totally different with BUGS is that we look for our ideas in OTHER BLOGS.
Everybody else looks fore the growth of their OWN audience, their OWN membership. I don’t think there is another group that does what we do: Look for the spread of our IDEAS. This is so unique that I only noticed it today.
Stop and think about this. Someday it is going to be absolutely impossible for people to think this just happened. It had to be planned.
It gives us a lesson in what drives people to think in terms of conspiracies. ONE lesson here is that people think of the other side as evil, and that they do not do things simply because they honestly feel that way. The reason we plant ideas without so much regard for our own expansion or recognition is obvious to US.
We are honestly only interested in what we have to say and planting our Mantra Thinking because we are actually only interested in the only thing nature is interested in, insuring that future generations look like us. This is absolutely impossible for others to believe.
But that is not the way those who oppose us think of us. We have an ulterior motive, so any success we are having cannot be because that is ALL we want. We did this successful thing because we had an Ulterior Motive. If you think that way, and that is the way people DO think, anything we do that turns out to be a success has some other motivation.
Some commenters have talked about how some of us might be successful in the future. Those will be looked upon as having gained their positions not because they simply have a way of thinking that made sense, but because they planned it that way.
No one wants to think we came up with something that was so obvious and they and their heroes were so busy doing the old thing that they sunk into oblivion because they were unoriginal and BORING. They will insist that their side was always right, not just mentally static.
If they look at us as we are, we deserve a lot of credit, but that is because realized they were ridiculous.
Damned few people are willing to admit in retrospect that they were just plain SILLY.
In order to avoid that conclusion they have to raise themselves and their own brilliance. In order to do that they have to raise US to the level of prophetic geniuses. That is why all Conspirators end up as all-powerful and superhuman. Whatever else you may say of the Learned Elders of Zion, you must admit it raises Jewish leaders to a level of all-seeing genius.
That is why I was so impressed by the fellow on Ventura’s show who said, “They’re smarter than we are.” He did not say it in an admiring way as conspiracy theorists or respectable conservatives do. He was simply saying that they were smarter than those who simply didn’t SEE it.
Respectable conservatives are that way. They cannot admit that conservatives have been a bunch of approval-starved morons. So they see leftists as the epitome of sophistication who are EVEN SMARTER than that Great Sophisticate William Buckley.
Conspiracy theorists will not admit that they are saps, but they also cannot give the other side credit for sincerely believing in what they say. So they explain it all not only by the Power and Genius of the other side, but also by their Evil: “We’re not dumb. We just lost because we’re Good and True and therefore Trustful.”
So they cannot learn from their mistakes. Their only weakness comes from their devotion to Good.
No one who thinks that way can ever learn simple basics.
Filter Down has always been accepted in all societies. Newly discovered ideas and techniques take a while to be accepted by the general population. Ideologues who refer to themselves as Idealists say that their progressive concepts have not yet “gotten accepted.”
This was legitimate in earlier times. In earlier societies basic knowledge remained fairly static, so the only dynamic was the filter down of the different TAKE on people’s knowledge and world view. But now we have a dynamic which is even more rapid than the fastest filter-down process. Today our view of reality itself changes far faster than the analysis of OLD world views filter down.
Marxism has filtered down into Political Correctness. But Marxism is a set of ideas derived from Kantian dialectics and, far more so, from the realities accepted in the mid-nineteenth century. Marx assumed that only human beings had institutions. Everyone in his time knew that only man had borders.
Marx assumed that only men had inequality. Marxism did not move a whit from those positions. Political Correctness is based on them today. Lysenko took over Soviet agriculture insisting that genetics was not important.
Today the Missing Frontal Lobes (MFLs) on our side get paid to debate the Communist fairy tale as if it were a serious point of view. If they took the Flat Earth Society that seriously, they would probably be institutionalized.
You will never get rid of this outdated crappola by taking it seriously. To coin a phrase:
When I was a child I thought as a child.
Now it is time to put away childish ways.
One of the lessons of BUGS is REPETITION. We were being beaten by human tape recorders, and we made fun of them. We enjoyed the ego boost so much we didn’t ANALYZE why those tape recorders were beating people with functioning frontal lobes.
We answered this mindlessness by putting out tomes.
Once again, you have to ask “Why is this information being PRODUCED?” The tomes were produced largely for ego. Those who wrote and read them felt superior. Those like me who gave them simple, Occam’s Razor analyses were, in some way, insulting them. This is the Semmelweis Effect.
You can look up Semmelweis or other things I mention in our excellent Search blank on the right side. To sum up, Ignac Semmelweis found in the mid-nineteenth century that women were dying in doctors’ hospitals after childbirth because doctors were going straight from dissection to delivering babies.
Doctors had all sorts of explanations for this death rate, including the one we considered most advanced: psychosomatic symptoms. Semmelweis died in a madhouse because he could not convince them that the cause was so uninspiring.
In other words, doctors kept killing mothers and babies because the solution hurt their EGOS.
Liberals presented themselves as Great Intellectuals and respectable conservatives like Buckley groveled at their feet, as they do today, and put out untranslated French quotes and fake accents.. And that , boys and girls, is the entire history of the last fifty years in America.
It is time we stop messaging our egos and started WINNING. Hence the Mantra.
Besides repetition, another thing the winners on the other side are criticized for is their takeover of foundations and paying organizations of every kind. As one rightist said, “Anything in our society that is not specifically conservative becomes a liberal front, land some of our groups do too.”
My boss John Ashbrook, was a pale conservative if there ever was one, but the John Ashbrook Foundation is totally neoconservative property.
Now the EGO analysis of this is “Them Bad, Us Good,” but translated into French to soothe our egos.
My analysis is that THEY are doing something right and we are, as usual, kidding ourselves that we are anything but LOSERS if we don’t see that.
I won’t be here forever, so I want to leave a legacy not only of the virtues of repetition but also of the virtues of REWARD. The Holocaust industry is an INDUSTRY. It pays people to push it.
Therefore it will never die.
On the other hand, if you leave behind a tradition of sacrifice, sacrifice, and nothing but sacrifice. One leader, when he was asked if anyone could succeed him, he said something seen by many as pure genius: “Yes, but they are all dead.”
This is usually quoted to show what a Great and Unique Man he was.
To me this is the ultimate failure. It is nothing to be proud of if you leave no intellectual heirs. But if you think only in terms of eternal sacrifice and how idealistic you yourself are, you will not leave any heirs. You concentrate on your own ego, and you get your own ego.
Congratulations and welcome to the Dead and Sterile World this kind of thinking leads to.
This is why I keep emphasizing that when our reaction comes, we must build a FOUNDATION with it, and lots of foundations. It is not out of revenge I want us to have a rewards system looking into the present holocaust against whites. I have simply observed what WORKS.
We should have people PAID to root our ads and support for genocide. There is a VAST source of money in it, and we should exploit it. The superrich and their heirs, the huge companies that sponsor quiet encouragement of interracial coupling in their ads, these represent hundreds of billions if no trillions of dollars.
Stalinist murderers can brag about it. A kid who was fourteen conscripted by the SS to work as a guard is hounded the rest of his life. I want THEM hounded. I want what I am living through to be REMEMBERED.
And the only way the lesson will be remembered, as we have been shown, is to REWARD those who REMEMBER it.
This is not revenge with me, thought God knows those who are committing genocide deserve all they get. But this is a PRACTICAL matter.
Look around you. LOOK at the RESULTS of those who never ask for revenge against Communists and those who PAY for revenge against Nazis. Look at the Che Guevara t-shirts and for ONE, for God’s sake, let’s show a little less foaming resentment and a little more ANALYSIS.
I am not in this to leave a reputation as a genius, as so many seem to be. After I die a billion dollar memorial will do me no good. I have fought my whole life for something and my one concern is that it will go the way of the geniuses who single wish is that be called irreplaceable.
The Semmelweis Lesson: if it saves life, concentrate on washing your hands. The Whitaker Corollary: Be sure that in future people will get revenge that PAYS.
Long before Orwell wrote 1984 there was a standard joke among lawyers about the Double Defense.
The Double Defense says that 1) “MY client didn’t do it and we have witnesses to prove he was elsewhere at the time of the crime” and “We also have witnesses who were at the scene who will testify that he was justified in doing it.”
Actually, some version of the Double Defense has been successfully used, but of course the lawyers consider any jury that would even consider such a defense a bunch of morons.
That is correct.
Imagine my reaction when our people routinely accept a Double Defense.
This Double Defense comes up all the time. Anti-whites say 1) we are NOT committing genocide and 2) Genocide is justifiable. Just how smart does that make US?
But I see this Double Defense in SF All The Time. The anti-whites go straight from denying genocide to repeating Mommy Professor’s Evil White Man stuff. So do any of our Ego Trip pro-whites simply point out that they are JUSTIFYING what they are DENYING?
Nossir. when the witness declares he didn’t do it and then goes on to say he is doing it for a REASON, Old Missing Frontal Lobe trails right along, arguing crime rates and colonization. They want to show how much they know, so it never occurs to them to put aside all their tome information and look at what the OTHER idiot, the one on the other side, just said.
It makes you tired, very, very tired.
A commenter sent me a link where a man who was a literature major has found that his whole mentality has been altered by the Internet. Where he once proudly treasure huge tomes, he is now impatient if a person can’t get to the point in a couple of paragraphs.
I keep repeating that you must always ask WHY a piece of information has been produced. In this case it is a matter of HOW it is produced.
IN order to say ANYTHING publicly, you used to get a maximum of one shot. Most didn’t get that.
You had to get name recognition, you had to get published. And when you got published you had to anticipate what the questions would be,.
Once again, using the Semmelweis Rule, the explanation of this is so simple it does not inflate the ego. What has happened is that the dam on information has been breached. It used to be a matter of slowly digging your way through the publication process or being accepted by one of the major networks. The process was very cumbersome.
Now you can simply say what you have to say and answer objections on the Internet the next day. You can hit people with an idea without being a respectable Buckley persona for the networks waiting months for the reviews.
So the heavy duty reading that went with the cumbersome old methods are as out of date as etching on stone.
In the new age you have to know what you are doing to say and SAY it.
More important, your reputation today is as a New York Intellectual will not make people read another whole book by you when they can hear others who simply have something to say and say it quickly.
If this method does not sound familiar to you you haven’t been reading BUGS long.
My commenters have internalized rules it took me years to formulate. One of these is that if what you are saying goes down too easily with anti-whites, you need to think about it.
Lord Nelson impressed me when he changed his line from white genocide, to the West being overrun. He didn’t realize he has changed it. He was reacting to the simple fact that the path of least resistance allies to the mind as well as physics. He suddenly found this was very easy to sell to anti-whites, and didn’t think over WHY.
Let me hasten to add that THE INSTANT I pointed this out, he saw what I meant and went back to the harder line.
A lot of readers won’t understand what the hard line is.
If you use the term “overwhelm” you are just one of the anti-immigration types.
We already have more than enough non-whites to do away with the race already inside our borders and they are multiplying like rabbits.
The only problem anti-immigration types have with non-whites here is that they refuse to have intercourse with their daughters. They “refuse to assimilate.”
That is NOT our problem.
Attacking immigration makes you a respectable conservative. Opposing interracial marriage or bastardization is “Hitlerism.”
It is also Jeffersonianism, but if you go onto the path of least resistance you won’t think of that.
Dave’s observation about my war on the costume fetish did what I read comments for, to maker me think. A free person is paranoid about anything that separates the people from Government. Nothing does that like a uniform.
My fate is to be decided by twelve of my peers and a god. I can do without the god, thank you.
What the hell is a judge doing in DRESS? This is a guy who is deciding life and death and he is dressing like a Superhero! NOBODY in a court of law should think of himself as more than a man.
And it is the nature of the human animal that what he wears affects his judgment. In European countries which were totalitarian and theocratic throughout their histories, there are only judges in their robes and little hats. The JURY is a purely Anglo-Saxon artifact. It was probably an expression of Britain’s loss of faith in its own people when judges and lawyers put on wigs.
Free people have a different relationship with those who govern them, one inn which costumes have no role. Try to imagine how the Founding Fathers would have reacted to Presidential Robes.
The Commander in Chief has no uniform.
In the fifteenth century most monarchs tried hard to keep all arms in the hands of nobles and soldiers. As with the jury system, England was a WILD exception. It is the only country I know of that ever punished PEASANTS for NOT having weapons!
It wasn’t much of a punishment, but after Crecy England’s military might depended on the longbow. That n turn depended on one’s having a longbow and practicing with it. It takes time and effort, and as more and more forms of amusement came along, fewer and fewer English peasants stuck to it.
A bowling lane has ten pins today because “nine pins” became so popular it was taking the peasants away from archery practice. They added a pin to make it legal.
But behind that little story is a bigger one. The kind and Parliament were actually trying to FORCE peasants to own and become expert with a weapon that killed armored knights. This was not the kind of thinking that was any more usual then than it is in Europe or blue states today.
What did the kings and the nobles really depend on in England? They lived and died by POLITICS. As I said, politics is life. The depended on their own popularity so completely that they tried to FORCE the people to have weapons that could kill them.
For obvious reasons you’ll have to wait a long time before any Mommy Professor mentions this historical oddity.
People without money will tell you that everybody’s motivated by money. If you want financial advice, go to a bar, sit down by the guy who is nursing the only drink he can afford, buy him more, and listen.
He will tell you how to make money. He will tell you the characteristics of people who make money. He will explain to you that making money is behind everything on earth. Money, he will explain, is the Objective Purpose of everything.
Someone WITH money, as they slide into their cups, will explain to you all about Power. They HAVE money, so it holds no ambition for them. In fact the main way someone like me got enough money to live on was being paid by rich folks who wanted power.
A person without money tends to believe that everybody is after what he is after, money. People who have money, he feels, are the bad ones.
A rich person in America does not have the power he feels he should have. People who have power, he insists, are the bad ones.
Uglies tend to believe the Beautiful People are just AWFUL.
If you do not have a white skin, it is easy to convince you that whites are terrible.
Depressive Puritan types hate joyful people, hoping they are damned.
The list is endless.
This goes along with the rule that those who hate are constantly condemning Hate, those who are merciless love abstract Mercy. The real explanation of this is quite simple. A person thinks about what he thinks about most. A billionaire does not think about money all that much. In fact, real luxury means that you don’t have to think about money at all: “If you have to ask the price you can’t afford it.”
BUGS is dedicated to straight, simple explanations like this. People who get PAID to be pundits do not think in my terms for a very simple reason. It is one reason respectable conservatives are the only professional commentators. If you hit a Politically Correct person with my kind of argument, the discussion is over.
They are getting laughed at.
Then it’s Dead Air. And Dead Air is death to talk programs.
So only a respectable conservative can keep the media commenters going.
Those who think about hate a lot capitalize it. They think that Hate explains human action. Those who think about money a lot think of money as the basis of all human motivation. Likewise Power. Likewise Mercy.
Paid pundits hate this kind of thinking for an equally simple reason. They get to paid to drag it out, to fill time and fill space on the printed page.
Hence the following verse, which once would have been called doggerel but now is referred to as the Art of Rap:
A NICKLE A WORD
In most magazines there’s always a place
For people with talent for filling up space.
That’s why they pay me a nickel a syllable
For filling up space that still remain fillable.
The things I say may not make sense
And seem to you absurd
For it’s not logic that I need
But words and words and words and words
And words and words and words.
Six months is a long time in what the pundits call politics. The 2010 elections look awful for the Democrats, with four consecutive defeats since the 2008 victory. But for me, that is not politics.
This sounds strange, since that was the sort of analysis I made my living on. To me, “politics” is a very, VERY long-term business. “Politics,” said the Greeks, “is life.”
“Politics is life.” There have been endless Wise Discussions on what those words meant. All of the famous ones begin at the same point: a total disinterest in what THE GREEKS meant by it. Likewise all popular theological discussion begins at a common point: a complete in what JESUS THE MAN meant in his own time.
Oddly enough there is nothing wrong with this. As I have said, Futurology has nothing whatsoever to do with the future. Likewise no interpretation of Jesus’ words has anything to do with understanding HIM. Futurology, like theology, lives or dies on its ability to interest people NOW and to get donations NOW.
Futurology is no more correct that Flash Rogers was, but it gets hundreds of millions of dollars each year and support thousands of people who call themselves Experts on the Future. Likewise Vatican II declared a huge number of things that Vatican I SPECIFICALLY determined to be heretical.
Since futurology has nothing to do with the future, and Christian Theology has little to do with Christ, it is no surprise that pundits have almost nothing to do with politics.
“Politics is life.” Well, most people realize that whether Mo is favored over Larry six months before the election constitutes “life.” Though in my myriad political campaigns I have seen exceptions to that rule, people whose whole life really is Mo’s percentage in a poll or whether one black basketball team beasts another, both teams more or less randomly selected from the same national pool.
But most people. If sober, will not insist that whether Sara Palin is ahead in the polls is a matter of life or death.
Politics is what we discuss here. “Politics is life” goes back to the real basis of life. The basis of life has always been very simple: Will the next generation look like YOU? The Greek’s life was the polis, whose life was determined by his definition of politics. The wolf lives and dies by his pack. Greeks survived or died with their polis.
One of the major steps forward in studying evolution was the inclusion into it of politics. Before that it was assumed that heroism was a purely human trait because mere animals only wanted survival for THEMSELVES: “Nature red in blood and claw.” No valor among animals.
Wrong. Higher animals almost universally survive in groups. To survive one must preserve one’s group. In African Genesis Robert Ardrey introduced us to animals who sacrificed themselves in ways that fulfill even the Obedient Generation’s claims for itself.
But heroism is necessary only where politics has FAILED. The baboon must throw itself to the wild dogs so its brethren have time to get to safety ONLY if the troop leadership FAILED and left the group in danger, The failure of political leadership becomes necessary makes death necessary on SOMEBODY’S part, in the group or among the heroes.
If we who practice REAL politics succeed, the race can live without the battle causing death.
Politics is life.
In 2008 the Democrats finally elected their kind of President. Kennedy was the last Democratic president from outside the Old Confederacy. Roosevelt was the last non-Southern Democrat to get a majority of the vote.
The reason for this was because the Democratic Convention kept nominating Hubert Humphrey and Massachusetts Democrats and McGoverns the country rejected. Finally the combination of George W’s Vietnam PLUS recession and the threat of “racism” that got Christopher Buckley’s endorsement, they won.
But the bottom line is that America finally got what the Democratic Convention had been trying to sell for two generations.
The Democrats remind me of a dog who keeps bringing dead animals to his master and can’t understand the cool reception they get.
When a hard-core liberal push gets defeated in MASSACHUSETTS, something’s WRONG.
What is wrong is probably the obvious point that Democrats have been blind to for many decades: Americans do not want what they desire.
It’s a classical problem: they’re too far left. Ho-hum.
Actually the Democrats have the same blindness Republicans do. Both were caught with their pants down when Reagan won in 1980 and Gingrich won in 1994. The congress of 1994 promptly began back-peddling to “the votes are in the middle of the road.”
In short, nothing is happening that we are not familiar with. National commentators, right and left, are always taken completely by shock when the obvious happens. They can’t see reality. They get PAID, on BOTH sides, NOT to see reality.
Those who believe in conspiracies have a touching faith in the good sense of those who wind up in power. A guy who can make money must be a genius in all things, so they can’t make all those mistakes without MEANING to.
If you spent as much time as I have near those with money and power, trying to make them see the simplest realities, the whole conspiracy bit makes you laugh. Yes, they ARE that stupid.
The geniuses who rule the left have one thing in common with Mommy Professor: they have the same basic premise as the conspiracy theorists have: that they are enormously intelligent. Mommy Professor is hopeless because he honestly believes he is an idealist and a genius.
One how thinks he is an idealist is immune to any feeling of loyalty or any pangs of conscience. One who thinks he knows all is incapable of learning. This is the picture Mommy Professor has of himself and this is the picture the superrich have of themselves.
They are absolutely incapable of seeing the obvious.
They have no way of LEARNING the obvious because anyone who points it out to them is considered simplistic. A genius has no use for a simplist.
What happened in Massachusetts is that the Democratic Convention FINALLY got what it want. They elected a black McGovern.
Only a conspiracy theorist could make that mysterious.
Reality Television has had an interesting by-product.
In my day Outside Reality came to us in the form of CNS, NBC, ABC and, for the fully brainwashed, PBS. Movies showed us that an American in a crisis was a panicking hunk of jelly until the guys in costumes and the College educated sophisticate came along.
On TV and in the movies, we were the aliens. No plot ever blamed Moscow. The movie always showed, and shows. The idea that Communists do something wrong as a cover for right wing evil, perpetrated by white Americans.
I have to switch away from Twilight Zone replays when they show something Southern, because it always shows that all blacks accused of crime are not only innocent but saints.
Reality TV is dangerous because it shows reality. The average American seldom goes to pieces in an emergency. Homeland Security can’t stop a terrorist but his fellow passengers could. But the media, including FOX, didn’t want to dwell on the implications of that. If the regular media worship regular bureaucrats, conservatives worship the ones in costume, and neither wants average Americans to get uppity.
Leftism and respectable conservatism is a team effort.
On Twilight Zone TV blacks are all saints. Watching Reality TV you are surprised, EVEN IN ALASKA, if the repeat criminal they catch is white.
As I have said, people got a bit tired of watching grown men scream and panic in regular TV whenever the villain shows up and The Authorities aren’t there. The official line of the media, including the good old respectable, was you should give the criminal everything he wanted. If he was raping your daughter, if was OK to scream, but better to keep smiling at him.
It is like the first reaction to that latest terrorist his fellow passengers took down. It was not to treat Americans less like a prison population, but to forbid them going to the bathroom within an hour of landing.
FINALLY, at LONG last, the reaction was an unbelieving laugh and some RESENTMENT for a change.
On very rare occasions he regular media might have to report a foiled robbery, but they ALWAYS said the resister “risked his life and that of others.” BAD boy!
Raised in that uniforms-are-everything Obedience Generation environment, it is hard for me to believe that I am seeing “American Fight Back” stuff. It is real breakthrough, but only I am going to point it out to you.
When someone demands objectivity, always ask, “WHOSE objectivity?” When they are questioned on such matter as their fanaticism for Obama or their unanimous screams against Goldwater they will shrug and say objectivity is not possible in the real world. Then they start declaring that all objective science is agreed on global warning and especially race.
All tyranny is based on objectivity. Ayn Rand said that Freedom is based philosophy of Objectivism. Her followers are as rigid and as mirthless as any Puritan. Cotton Mather, Karl Marx, CS Lewis, Ayn Rand, all of them see spontaneous joy as evil, as an enemy of the grim Objectivity they are trying to promote.
In his Surprised by Joy, Lewis hurried to point out that his Joy was not a happy emotion.
I have written repeatedly that the person who calls everybody a liar in invariably a liar himself, that those who shout Mercy loudest uses it as an excuse for unlimited torture, that the person who scream HATE is always motivated by hatred himself, and that an experienced cop will look twice at anyone who is trying to look TOO innocent.
Mercy is the opposite of mercy, all capitalized virtues are their historical opposites.
Objectivity is the antithesis of freedom in history. And Freedom is the opposite of freedom because Freedom is objective. That is why it is capitalized. Actual freedom exists precisely to the extent that Objective Judgment stops limiting it.
Wordism says Freedom is a matter of WHO limits it. One is Truly Free only if he is obeying he law or the Lord or Marx or Mommy Professor.
And that, brothers and sisters, is ALL that the word freedom means.
Because of what freedom really is, a free person must always regard EVERY form of judgment as an imposition. Tyranny has absolutely nothing to do with the Words which lead to limiting it. BY its very name, society must limit freedom. But one must never look upon one excuse, one form of Wordism, as better than another.
I once called cop in Britain because a loudmouth was sitting on his roof next to my hotel. When the cop showed he ran. The cop told me he couldn’t do anything anyway, because in Britain a man’s home was his castle. I asked him what about he Englishman n his hotel room trying to sleep. One cannot throw rocks from his castle so why can he throw noise?
Nobody ever answers me.
And what about my right to go straighten the guy out myself. That I didn’t bring up before a cop, but it is freedom any Anglo-Saxon would have recognized.
None of my freedoms mattered because the man in front of me had on a costume. He represented Objectivity.
The loudmouth’s freedoms have to be weighed against mine. That is true and it is what people say. But my point here is that, as usual, they say it but they don’t THINK about it.
My point is that the BALANCE is the point, not the JUSTIFICATION. In Rule WW2 I pointed out that the media or a respectable conservative cannot say that shooting someone down for trying to escape a Red country is not the same thing as a right-winger shooting someone down. If that were evil the entire Communist Empire would be evil., OBVIOUSLY evil from the word go.
But this cannot be because the left cannot be evil, just as Jews cannot hate and only whites can be racists.
No human being is objective or perfect in any other way. But the inability to be altogether good is no excuse for evil and the imperfection at being objective is not a license not to be. But Wordists use their Truth as an excuse, whether it is their version of Patriotism or Mommy Professor’s Progressivism or the million different declaration of the Will of the Lord.
Wordism sees no such balance.
Wordism is insane.
In Red Dawn a Cuban asks the Patrick Swayze character why he thinks his Wolverines have a right to fight the invading Soviets. The Wolverines reacted in a very realistic way.
First, he is comp-lately chocked by the question, it seems so stupid. Then he says, “Because we LIVE here!” The main reason the very low budget Red Dawn was such a hit and made Swayze an instant major star was because it reawoke images of an old American hero, grandma, sitting on the porch with a shotgun waiting for the county to come try to take over her house for a new highway.
Old Granny With a Shotgun was the American hero the World War II Generation disowned If the Government put them in costumes and orders they would not hesitate to kill the old bitch. She has the outdated American attitude “I LIVE here!”
The Greatest Generation, the Obedient Generation, would tell her, “Nothing is YOURS, Grandma. This is a government of laws not of men.”
And above all, they would say, “Grandma, this is for YOUR OWN GOOD.”
They went overseas and saved Stalin and gave one third of the world’s population to the Communists.
They Saved the World. The Reds in Red Dawn would certainly have agreed that that was true. But what did it do for US? Instead of having Communists and Fascists fighting each other, we ended up giving totalitarians the A-Bomb and a share of the world they never dreamed of until the US Saved the World for them.
We spent most of my life trying to contain the Communists and avoid a nuclear war. We sentient countries routinely on the idea that it was good for them. In fact, it was our unpopularity in those countries that the Reds fed on. The very people who would happily kill Grandmas for blocking the formation of a Collective Farm, which did kill millions of Kulak grannies, babushkas, for exactly that purpose, were the Wolverine line against us.
The justification was that we were keeping Communists from taking them over. But they hadn’t ASKED us to do that. And that was not the real justification for our interference in other countries. Our real justification was that Communism was dangerous to US. After the Obedience Generation gave a billion people to the Reds we were on the defensive.
But we had to talk in World War II terms. We had fought for the Reds. We really couldn’t say that we were fighting Communists because they were evil, evil like the Nazis. We had already thrown ourselves totally on their side against the Nazis as fellow fighters against Evil. We had allied with them and recognized them in the United Nations.
It was not until Reagan that any American president used the word “evil” to the Soviet Empire. The media blew sky high.
I can also tell you that, like “Mister Gorbeczev, tear down this wall,” Reagan had to reinsert that term Evil Empire REPEATEDLY because his staff kept taking it out of his own speech. People who were behind the Iron Curtain have said this was the speech that galvanized them, gave them HOPE.
Evil Empire and Gorbeczev tear down this wall are the two things that stand out in the history in the Reagan Administration, and his staff fought to take out BOTH of them. If Reagan had not been born in 1911, he probably would have gone along with them. But his mind had been set before the Obedience Generation took over.
Nobody else remembers grandma with her shotgun.
We could not denounce the Soviet Empire because the Obedience Generation thought just like them. As with the Mantra, this is a blind spot that is so deeply ingrained in our thinking that nobody SEES it. It is the rule that you have to be a right-winger to be EVIL.
Very few people wonder about why calling the Soviet Empire Evil was such a violation of the rules. Like the ongoing genocide against whites, they SEE it but they do not know it. Very few people on the left would hesitate to call every European Empire Evil.
But even the non-Communist American left screamed bloody murder, as did Reagan’s own staff, when he violated the World War II Rule that only the right can be called Evil.
If you see the World War II you can see why Stalin and Churchill were natural allies. The last imperialist British Prime Minister destroyed the Empire he loved just as Stalin built his. World War II decided that a left-wing empire was OK or just a little wrong, whereas a right-wing empire was Evil, just as a Leftist dictatorship was a bit too idealistic, whereas a left-wing dictatorship was the People’s Friend.
Like the Mantra, this rule as never stated publicly but everybody knew it. That’s why Reagan’s staff so desperately tried to keep him from violating this rule. That’s why everybody expected it when the media hit the roof when Reagan did that.
Churchill and Stalin thought exactly alike, and both of them thought like the post-WW2 US foreign policy. Churchill thought of his Empire, not as a prop for British power and pretensions, but as good for the natives, Kipling’s White Man’s Burden. Stalin and Bush and Johnson all justified their imperialism the same way.
You don’t have Vietnam Wars and Iraq Wars on the basis of US self-interest.
Just as the Inquisition hit new highs of torture in the name of Mercy and Communism set new highs of massacre and induced poverty in the name of peace, land and bread, modern imperialism always claims the good of the people it is interfering with.
And the man who says “Lie!” most is a liar.
And the man who screams “HATE!” loudest is a hater.