Archive for October, 2010
What destroys an established religion in our latter days is not being wrong, it is being SILLY. In Nietzsche’s day, the various churches had fought vaccination, the idea that earth was over 4500 years old, the idea that the earth was not the center of the universe, and in fact worn a dunce hat over and over and over again for all to see.
When Nietzsche said God is Dead, he meant for intellectuals, real ones, not Mommy Professors. He meant that at the top of the idea chain, the God Industry had made a laughing stock of faith.
The Religious Industry lives entirely in THIS world. For a millennium and a half it had dictated all reality. The idea that His Kingdom is not of this world was absolute heresy.
I did a review of a Galbraith book many years ago for National Review. Posing as an intellectual biography, it was the same crap he had put in the hundred books before it. It had the usual supply and demand don’t work in it.
My statement was, “Galbraith is still talking about leftism in theory. Leftism is collapsing because it has been put into practice.”
Faith in the next world cannot be proven by discrediting evolution here.
This is a routine lesson no one has learned: You win power on theory, but once the theory is tried out, you are in deep trouble.
That’s what happened to the religion decided on at Trent and that’s what happened to the main line Protestant faiths invented by Luther and Calvin. Until competition from the Pentecostals made them toe the line more, they were actually on their way to the complete collapse European Protestantism has accomplished.
Exactly the same thing happened to the left with the trying out of Communism in the real world. You won’t see much real difference between how a Marxist today argues and how anti-evolutionists argue.
When the Soviet Empire collapsed FROM PURE SILLINESS, the whole leftist charade was exposed. No Christian wants to talk about the Christianity Industry’s battle against smallpox, and no leftist wants to talk about the fall of Communism.
Why not? Because any discussion of these things shows how SILLY they were. Not how their theories had imperfections, but just plain dribble-mouth silliness. I remember right after the USSR fell, one after another leftist commentator congratulated a respectable conservative on his understanding that liberalism is NOT Communism.
Actually Kennedy had been working with the Communists to undermine Reagan. The KGB files are filled with the people McCarthy called Communists. The last desperate bid to save the Soviet Empire by defeating the Strategic Defense Initiative they called Star Wars took out all the stops, all the pretense that the entire left was on the same side.
Joe Sobran noticed that, and wrote an article for National Review called “Congress’s Red Army.”
With new advances in knowledge about real animal behavior, the whole BASIS of leftist theory has been swept away. As it is tried out in practice it really shows its nonsense.
The Obama election has been a shouting example of this reality.
None Dare Call it Silly. That is, none who want to make a living in the kept opposition.
Things will look a little rough over the next couple days, but I think you will enjoy the new theme.
Threaded comments are now available as well as adjustable text size and screen width.
Born Again Christianity has reached its stagnation phase. In my youth it was growing wildly, and now it has stopped or the curve is reaching the asymptotic stage.
There are a couple of clear reasons for this. First of all, Born Again Christianity has become an industry. Those who control it now depend upon it for their livelihoods.
Secondly the same thing has happened to evagelicalism that brought down the Mainline Protestant churches in North America and the Catholic Church in South America: it put its cards in THIS world, and it LOST.
I asked before, what part of “My Kingdom is not of this world” do Bible-thumpers have trouble understanding? When the main Catholic church threw itself into being a tool of big landowners in South America and a major part of the priesthood sided with the Communists in the name of Liberation Theology, everybody had assumed it had Both Sides covered.
But both Communism and the big landowners have been discredited.
While the Catholic Church was seeking power on both sides in South American politics the evangelicals were out there conquering the next world. I saw a documentary on a back area of Bolivia or Peru, the announcer said “We are the first Westerners here,” and at that moment they came on a lake some Born Again missionaries were doing baptisms.
I used to get my ammunition reloaded in the dormitories of our local Born Again theology school. Out in the African bush you would often find that the only people were mercenaries and missionaries.
Christianity in Europe has simply collapsed. Someone will write in that “they have proven” this is no longer true, but it is routine for a giant church to have a tiny group of people sitting in the front.
What caused Nietzsche to say “God is dead” was that the churches had taken on Galileo and lost, and then they had taken on every new theory in the eighteenth century and lost.
There were still lots and lots of healthy churches in America, but at the top of the intellectual ladder, from which ideas filtered down, it seems to Nietzsche that it had doomed itself.
This is of interest to us because this whole section of moving toward how or PRESENT established religion is dooming itself.
Born Agains are now more interested in Pro-Life than they are in the next world, where Jesus said HIS Kingdom is. If they had had their way, the tens of thousands of babies born from in vitro fertilization, babies who were wanted, would never have been Born.
For the moment, Pro-Life is a boon to Born Again Industry. You keep your congregation contributing and you don’t go where learning to reload ammunition is a survival skill.
Christianity survived because it backed down from crap like this.
Every church in London denounced Jenner’s satanic practice of putting germs from cows into human beings. But as their congregations began to die or come into church disfigured for life, they somehow totally forgot their theological objections.
Those objections are as valid today as they were then. But an industry drops any product that becomes enormously destructive to its very existence.
Prohibiting abortion is no longer on the Born Again list of possibilities, so they have branched out into crippling any research that they decide involves embryos. Eventually, as in the case of vaccinations, they will get in the way of people in wheelchairs walking and replacing diseased or aging body parts.
Then this silly crap will be seen as silly crap.
You see, the nice thing about these social issues is that they make the preacher or priest feel he is being realistic and practical. It gets him off the simple fact that either Heaven and Hell are real or he is a guy who lives on nonsense or even a guy wearing a dress for no reason.
When the church sticks to all or nothing, Heaven or Hell, not of this world, it can grow. But if the fight is over THIS world, and it goes beyond doing to others what they do to you, it goes to stagnation, and then on down.
If I were a doomed embryo I would be happy if I could be used to get somebody out of a wheel chair. But any discussion of the Golden Rule in human affairs is denounced today as Humanism.
So Born Again has stagnated.
Next I will explain my ideas as to how this is what is happening to the established religion we are under right now.
Almost a decade ago, when I first mentioned Zoroastrianism on Whitaker Online, there was a chorus of catcalls. It still seems strange, even to regular BUGS readers, that I talk so much about the history of religion.
Once again, people will agree that Political Correctness is our established RELIGION, but they don’t THINK about it.
Realizing this is a RELIGION makes it an entirely different thing from the Conspiracy of Geniuses or the Force of History that so many of us, tragically, think it is.
You see, every historical religion went under because it sought food for its priests and power in THIS world. Every religion becomes an industry, and like any other industry. Then another one comes and out competes it. That is what has happened to millions of religions.
In my lifetime, the Main Line Protestant religions were visibly disappearing. The Methodist Church membership consisted heavily of living people who had been raised in that church and never bothered to change to “agnostic.”
I remember when the one thing that distinguished evangelical Christianity from the industrial version was GROWTH. A major portion of the American population shifted into Born Again religion . Totally unnoticed by our media, South America had new millions of Born Again Christians every year.
Until they went political, Born Again Christians were on their way to conquering both Americas.
In discussing economics, I made the point that things don’t collapse visibly. It is simple arithematic: things stagnate, THEN they decline. Born Agains have stagnated. Economies have stagnated..
Historically this stagnation phase goes unnoticed.
Those who notice it are later called Prophets.
In fact the stagnation phase is the absolute peak level of the idea that this industry or this society will go on forever.
When Hadrian built his Wall, it announced two things:
1) the Roman Empire had reached the limits of its expansion, and 2) those limits were set in stone because they were meant to last forever. And in Hadrian’s time it was assumed that the Roman Empire would last forever and the Eternal City of Rome would be its omega just as it had been its alpha.
When Constantine moved his capitol to Byzantium, it was not a declaration that his Roman Empire had ended, and he did not resign his job.
In fact, the Holy Roman Empire was finally ended by Napoleon seventeen centuries after Hadrian. The actual direct line of Caesars only ended in 1453, when Constantinople fell to Islam.
Even after Napoleon, Russia called itself The Third Rome and Tsar, King, and Kaiser meant emperor in the Roman sense. The Pope is Pontifus Maximus, one of Caesar’s titles.
The point is that if people can’t even agree on when the Roman Empire fell, how can they possibly recognize the stagnation point?
But to us this is all a quibble. History tells us that the Roman Empire fell sometime in the first part of the first millennium, but you will play hell finding an agreed-one date.
The fact is that the collapse that everybody seems so obsessed with IS a quibble. It is the point of stagnation that really matters.
While hundreds of billions of dollars are spent on social science research and teaching, BUGS advances alone into the findings of the late twentieth century about how real societies work in nature.
All the ideologies we have today existed before these discoveries were made, and not a single one has made the slightest effort to adapt to the new realities.
Please note that I did not say they were doing it WRONG. I said they are IGNORING its existence. That is giant difference.
Right now we have Obama worshippers pushing programs that failed in the past, and an opposition fighting for less of it.
And everybody gets paid.
Don’t feed the bears.
Don’t reward failure.
History is entirely different with the new biology. Christians find their churches falling into the same old failures. They say “They’re not doing it right.”
Marxists are famous for dealing with their interrupted series of disasters with the words, “They just didn’t do it right.”
The Catholic Church has famously done all the things people bitch about.
Which part of “My Kingdom is not of this world” do they have trouble understanding?
When an institution exists in THIS world it will adapt or die. The new studies of real natural societies show that all the things Marxism and what calls itself Christianity want to abolish are part not only of human nature but of Meer Kats with spoon size brains.
What Marxism is trying to abolish and those who use their faith as a guide to social behavior is hard wired into human beings.
We know that now. It is time we started acting like we do.
A commenter made an excellent point about another illusion that handicaps Mantra Thinking: the illusion that people have as they grow old is that they are therefore Wise.
This is, in fact, twin with the problem of people who have been dealing with a problem unsuccessfully for decades at public expense automatically being declare Experts on solving it. But this one makes life especially difficult for me.
I am handicapped by the general image of a Leader and the general image of an old man who is writing. BUGsers are very kind to me, so they do not want to be disrespectful and they actually apologize for disagreeing with me.
That is good behavior if it doesn’t get in the way of what BUGS is all about. One new commenter was obviously uncomfortable contradicting me and one of our old hands told him that my reaction would be “So what?” I really appreciated that.
I tell you my view of the world. One reason you read BUGS is because you think I’m right often enough to be worth while. But I have a personal reason for writing here too.
As usual things in BUGS interrelate. Years ago I wrote a piece about a method of getting real information out of famous experts, real ones.
The problem is that someone who knows a subject has developed a standard set of answers. So if you take out time to go to a lecture or, worse, are seeing someone your boss has PAID you to go to, you get standard fare from him. The result is that you go back with something you could have just looked up.
My solution was simple. I found out what this guy really hated.
I would state a position in his field of expertise that he loathed.
Then I kept prodding that way and the standard stuff stopped. He began to give me examples and his actual opinions in the heat of getting me off that position that he hated so much.
When a person is Giving Advice, he is very guarded and he will have technique for handling all questions and he will be a lot like a lawyer who will not let you probe into certain areas. Make him mad enough and all bets are off.
Which is the reason you wanted to see him in the first place.
I want to dump out my thinking here so you can comment on it and look things up for me. I am not a Leader, I am not depending on my age.
Considering the world older people have left younger ones, it seems outrageous to me that they would have the cajones to say that young people should look to them for dealing with reality. While respect and courtesy is welcome, too much of that attitude would be fatal to the whole purpose of BUGS.
Think of BUGS as saying the only thing the older generation has any right to say to say to the people we have dumped all this on:
Where did we go WRONG?
My sister, who was a religious education director, taught me one good way to deal with problems: “If they keep bringing something they can’t agree on a solution to, appoint a committee.”
This obviously had nothing to do with the problem. What it did was stop two or three people from wasting hours arguing in meetings my sister had to attend, and let them yell at each other on their own.
We do exactly the same thing all the time, but we pay big money for the committee. The DEA is one of these committees. My sister’s committees cost nothing and made no problems. All of the committees, we form, the government organizations and lobbying groups, do a lot of harm and are hugely expensive.
More important, they get in the way of any rational approach to the problem. The DEA does a lot of public relations work with drug busts and politicians and respectable conservatives get to scream about he problem.
And the bureaucracy sprouts “experts.” People who have made a problem worse for many, many years become “experienced.”
I remember an interview with an expert, a judge who opposed minimum sentencing laws. He kept saying we should take his word for it, because he was “experienced.” He had been sentencing people for many years.
The interviewer tried weakly to explain to this imbecile that the whole minimum sentencing movement was directed against “experienced” people like him who were letting criminals off.
The judge didn’t even notice his point. The judge went in saying to the people, “YOU IGNUNT!” and he was experienced.
Never set up a program to deal with something if you don’t demand SPECIFIC results. Don’t set a program if you aren’t going to monitor it regularly and be willing to abolish it if it fails.
That not only does not deal with the problem, it creates a whole set of people who are paid NOT to deal with it. It licenses experts who will defend failure to the death.
It puzzles me why BBG thought my episode in the Pacific island during WWII was sexual in nature. But he was automatically defending the Catholic Church the way I automatically defend the South.
It puzzled me for a long time why Northern ethnics and I seemed to have something basic in common. It seems to me that we had in common the fact that we were loyal something and our enemies were united only in their hatred of identity.
I get tired of people looking cowlike and saying J. Edgar Hoover believed the Mafia was a myth. J. Edgar Hoover was not a cop, he was a public relations genius. He could put white trash sellouts into the Klan easily, but he couldn’t deal with organized crime, so he denied its existence.
Wordism cannot deal with races and real nations, so it denies their existence.
But those who don’t know the simple fact that Hoover called the Mafia a myth because he couldn’t do anything about it aren’t really able to think about the man.
The reason that J. Edgar couldn’t deal with the Mafia was largely because, like the police, he could only catch the little fish who got their hands dirty. Until the passage of RICO, which outlawed all actions in an organization that were criminal, nobody could touch the Mafia bosses.
The reason this is relevant here is because this is the exact problem the Catholic Church has today.
Any reasonable person sees the difference between someone pushing dope to feed his habit and what we called a “clean dealer,” someone who was not addicted and did it for money. You don’t send an addict to prison so easily, because there is usually no easier place for him to get drugs.
Also, an addict is simply less guilty than a clean dealer. Above all, it is the bosses of the drug rings who are guilty and in fact purely evil. Organized crime of any kind has the same problem. You couldn’t deal with organized crime as long as the only people who committed the actual crimes were the “soldiers.”
People who attack the Catholic Church are lot like J. Edgar Hoover. They scream for the lynching of the perverts, little fish one can condemn easily and freely.
Like Hoover, they cannot deal with the real problem, so they say the Church hierarchy are OK guys and then get kudos for denouncing perverts.
A bishop does NOT have to have a legal case against a pervert. He can AND DOES suspend priests on suspicion. Contrary to well-meaning defenders of the Church he does NOT have to send a man he knows is molesting children from one parish to another to continue to molest children.
When they broke up that meeting of Mafia bigwigs in the 50s and the Mafia became front page news, Hoover was forced to recognize that the Mafia was NOT a myth. This was very hard on him because he had to admit that his All Powerful FBI was a paper tiger.
The bottom line: You can’t deal with a criminal conspiracy by only prosecuting those who actually follow the orders of the bosses and get caught doing actual crimes.
But we are dealing with the real world here. We are Mantra thinkers, not theologians. We do not stop with moral outrage. In fact, we go beyond the moral outrage and THINK.
Whitaker’s Rule on Moralists is this: The moralist says that something must be done, sets up a government organization to do it, the government program can’t do it but it is a government program, which is what the Idealists and Intellectuals are after, and it is someone to blame as the problem gets worse.
Last part of this rule: the problem always DOES get worse. Why? Because the effort that should have been expended on dealing with the problem has been wasted on getting another government program through.
The War on Drugs is another example of this Hoover problem on the political right. They want to Solve the problem by raising money to demand the DEA and so forth GET TOUGH.
Any professional in the DEA has long since known that the whole thing is repeat of Prohibition, but worse. So they run around like J. Edgar Hoover did, giving their equally professional reporters dramatic pictures of drug busts.
The first alternative when you have a problem is to fix it. But Mantra Thinking says that if you CAN’T fix it, then stop claiming you are doing something until you are willing to fix the problem itself, not to show you are Doing Something.
Doing Something makes the problem worse. Doing Something earned two thousand years of Medical Professionals a good living while they quoted Galen, did horoscope charts for their patients and bled them to death.
Doing Something and Addressing The Problem is what Mommy Professor and respectable conservatives make their living on. It protects you from having to get any RESULTS.
And no bureaucracy wants to be judged by RESULTS.
I enjoy the irony of reducing a reality to simple terms. For example, a trend lately has been referring to a study, real or imagined, that shows that superrich and super powerful people are inconsiderate of to the people’s feelings, rude, or, as the old saying goes, “He’s ugly, he can’t sing and he don’t love Jesus.”
First of all, after hearing the profile of the rich a famous a number of times, all it says is that the rich and powerful are like spoiled children.
The lesson I am given from this is that this is how people act who are successful. It may be how people act BECAUSE they are successful.
A person with any experience in the world assumes that this is another one of those things one always hears at a party, expressing a trendy opinion and beginning with “They found out that…”
It still seems to work, but one who has been around a while has to be pretty stupid not to note that every time “They found out that…” is an example to reinforce the latest trendy opinion of the party set and that last time “They found out …” something entirely different.
Anyone who has actually been engaged in population-related studies knows how hard it is to get a consistent sample of anything. But “They found out…” about superrich people by presumably getting a statistically significant number of them together, say two or three thousand, and that the sample is not skewed, so they were able to make their selection from say a hundred thousand volunteers.
How do you assemble several thousand multimillionaires? Anybody who can do THAT isn’t doing academic studies at a professor‘s pay grade..
In other words when you THINK about it the whole thing is absurd.
It is useful to make an impression at the kind of parties I went to, that is one reason they are held. So when someone says “They found out that …” I am the only one who asks, “Who are THEY?”
People no more expect that than they expect a conservative accused of racism to ask, “What is racism?”
But I use the question to go ahead and make the points I made above.
Does this fake “study,” whatever its real source, prove what the trendy thing is, that one BECOMES rich and powerful by acting like a spoiled Jewish kid who was raised by a Jewish Mother, or does it simply show that the rich are spoiled?
Does it exist?
Actually, I would be surprised if, in a society which is based on disloyalty, those who made it up the carious ladders today were not largely scum.
If that is true, it might be a good idea to think about how long those ladders are going to hold up.
For it or agin it, everyone admits that Evolution was a major development. In the last half of the last century, we have an equally revolutionary change in our picture of Nature.
But none of it is even mentioned in the social sciences. All of our social theories, from Communist to Libertarian, go back to the 1950s idea that man was his own product, that all social structures were imposed on man by the System.
Karl Marx wanted to dedicate Das Kapital to Darwin but Darwin refused. In the introduction to Kapital, Marx recognized advances in science about man, something no Marxist will do today.
I heard that Nathaniel Branden was Ayn Rand’s husband. I heard from their followers that he had himself sterilized and made it his life’s work to prove that man has no instincts.
This is probably true. Marx and Ayn Rand were both trying to prove that the social system and logic made man what he is. Both of them came from Rousseau’s idea of the Noble Savage. Man was Noble until he was corrupted by Private Property or by government that warped him.
This is NOT an exaggeration. This is what we believed in the 1950s, just as we believed that continents stayed in the same place forever. As with the Mantra, you don’t need to be a great analyzer to make everything Intellectuals believe today look as ridiculous as it is.
You just have to state it in plain, uncompromising English.
And that is what respectable conservatives are paid NOT to do. None of them will ever point out that revolutions in science have put every single political and social theory on the Left and on the Right into the dustbin.
Another thing that has gone without notice into the dustbin is the entire theory of psychoanalysis.
In 1950, there was no such ting as schizophrenia. It was called the Schizophrenic Response. Like everything else in the post-Hitler world, everything about the human brain was a response to social stimulae, not genes, which were only mentioned by naziswhowantedtokillsixmillionjews.
Today if you were to state what social scientists insisted on in 1950, you would leave your audience thunderstruck.
Which is why respectable conservatives have a whole industry going built around NOT talking about such things.
One period in the history of medicine fascinates me. With the discovery of bacteria and of blood circulation and about everything else we actually know about medicine today, the Balance of Humors of the Roman Galen, which had been the foundation of all medical education until that time, was simply tossed out the window.
But how could professors who were middle-aged and had studied nothing BUT Galen and astrology and so forth, men who had made it up through the bureaucracy of the medical studies of their time, possibly throw out the old trash?
It would be good to know, because the social sciences are in exactly the same position today. The idea that animals have no social classes, no territory and that male birds tweet to attract female birds is as dead as bleeding to cure pneumonia.
This has happened before, and I am sure the old medical elite tried to restate everything in Galen’s terms and simply put the quietus on what the real world looked like, just as the social sciences are doing today.
Bleeding for pneumonia was still around to kill George Washington in 1799. The present social scientists will be followed by many a president in the next generation.
But all present political theory, in fact all present social science, is as out of date as Galen. The foundation is gone. The superstructure is huge, and has a lot of momentum.
But eventually people get down to speaking English. When people start doing that, Mommy Professor is dead.
We called them Home Truths because they “hit you at home.”
They HURT. A good example is the kid who went out for high school football who was five foot four and barely weighed maybe a hundred pounds. The coach would tell him that there were come unofficial physical requirements that prevented him from giving the kid a tryout.
Of course, the Home Truth, what the coach was thinking, was “Dammit, you know you’re too LITTLE for me to put you out there even for practice. I would be responsible, and you should damned well know it.”
I have found that more Home Truths are funny than they are painful.
We had a Home Truth about our Populist Forum and we had a truly ingenious way to deal with it. But I have never met anybody who didn’t laugh when I described it because it IS funny.
A lot of people talked about an alliance between the grass roots working people who backed Wallace and the regular conservatives, but no one knew how to make a start.
So Bob Hoy, who had press experience, dealt with the press and made the grassroot contacts. My wife, who was a legal secretary did the paperwork and the real organizing, and me, who conceived it and did the writing.
The Communist Party Daily World described us as a “large heavily financed organization” and we loved them for it.
You seem the Home Truth was that we were three people with full time jobs and no budget. Hoy was getting the national news media to our press conferences for anti-busing, independent truckers, national protests against dirty textbooks required by the educational establishment, and on and on.
Let me claim my credit here. Hoy got the press and did the field work, but the people we dealt with were uniformly stunned by my writing. It is really weird for a person used to ordinary language to hear EXACTLY what he said translated into a press release.
They would sit a moment in a surprise and then say, “That’s EXACTLY what I said.”
They were used to their preacher putting God’s spin on what they were fighting for. They were used to conservatives and liberals putting their spin on it. When they heard me say exactly what they would have said if they knew how to write press releases, they were always amazed.
But we usually let them think we represented an Organization. The media would have been hard for Hoy to get there if they had known that, while all the other people vying for their attention were big outfits or Celebrities, we were three people and no budget.
So when Hoy had to deal with the press, he never refused on his own and ticked them off. When I dealt with conservatives, I made no decisions that contradicted them. Hoy said that Whitaker or Brigitte had the decision on this, I said that one of them did.
Sometimes we had what we called “a show call.” Hoy had to turn a group down for our services or refuse to give something to the press. He got on the phone with them listening and called me or Brigitte. If it was Brigitte who was available, he made unblushing use of Male Chauvinism.
You see, on a show, Brigitte became the “supervisor.” Then and probably now, everybody assumed a female supervisor meant that she we speaking for an even bigger Boss who couldn’t be disturbed.
That’s three levels of organization. Obviously we were a large, heavily financed operation.
Or Hoy would call Bob Whitaker, who was up there on Capitol Hill. All of us knew exactly what was going on from the tone of voice we used. Hoy or Bob was obviously talking to his Superior, the Man Who Made the Real Decision. Not just anybody could speak for all the money and organization in The Populist Forum.
So when I got a call, I knew my role. Whatever it was Hoy needed at the moment, he would say the right things to me. If he needed a veto, he would make that clear, and the other way around.
The Home Truth, three overworked people and no budget was never even suspected. I became the official spokesman for the working people for the national conservative movement.
Truth can be grim, but it can also be funny.
Back in my day, the professional commentators never even appeared in public before they had been vetted. Edward R. Murrow, Walter Cronkite and Dan Rather went up through the media bureaucracy to get into the small group from which their Anchor Man status was chosen.
Blog audiences are one hell of a lot tougher. You don’t have to complain when I let you down, though I would prefer it. You just don’t show up.
When I was getting dangerously tired, I took some time off and Brian, who knows my writings better than anybody else, would put in Blasts From the Past from a decade of writing and my books.
Brian called me back fast because our readership from dropping like a rock.
That was an IMPORTANT experience, and unlike the old Commentators, I had to THINK about it.
In the days when ABC, NBC, CBS and “Educational” TV were the only choices, people wrote thousands of letters of complaint. Rather could tell those people to go to hell if they didn’t like his East Coast opinions.
The blog world is, to say the least, a bit different. You have literally millions of choices and more every day. We used to need TV as our one choice for visual entertainment at home. But the blog world doesn’t even have that advantage. Most people use the Internet all the time and never look at a blog.
It reminds me of how Mommy Professor is always praising the Marxist countries because there “The Intellectual” is supposed to rule. A Mommy Professor wouldn’t last two weeks in a real Communist bureaucracy.
Dan Rather or Walter Cronkite wouldn’t last a week on a blog except for their Big Names. Phil Donahue tried a cable network show, Big Name and all, where he commented on politics. He was out on his ass in a month.
Everybody who goes on the Internet, like our White Rabbit, finds that he has to offer lots of news, no matter what he would LIKE to repeat. It is an astounding accomplishment that BUGS gets a thousands of hits and a steadily growing audience while sticking to my strategy advice and commentary.
For me, you BUGSers represent an accomplishment no big blog can claim.
And I LISTEN. Dan Rather could and did ignore thousands of complaints as a matter of routine.
But I don’t get that much warning. One commenter simply mentioned that, “Bob is very interesting when he isn’t talking about himself.”
You better believe I thought about that on and on and on: It warned me about the Old Man’s Disease of ruminating.
In the Dan Rather world, a thousand letters one way or the other didn’t matter much. He dealt in tens of millions and he was part of a monopoly.
In the blog world, you are here because you choose it. The Donahues and the Rathers went down like rocks when cable news came in.
BUGSers compliment me a lot. As I said, keep your mind on the COMPETITION. Nobody is here unless they really LIKE what I have to say. With millions of blogs and all else to choose from, it would be absurd if the people who read BUGS DIDN’T think I was pretty great.
Also, we are a considerate group of people. Psychopaths and sadists don’t show up here. A person who is genuinely worried about the survival of his race is the opposite of the kind of person who is only out for himself, or even the majority whose main worry is Popular Opinion.
So I study your comments. People who didn’t like Rather told him so.
It sounds trite, but it is a profound truth: I am dealing with people who CARE.
Not only do you care, you care about something the entire establishment is screaming at you NOT to care about.
To an old man who dealt in questioning people, you don’t have to shout at me or acidly criticize me for me to HEAR you.
And, since I know that you do CARE, I can dig out stuff I need to think about even when you are barely saying it.
When I say one of my crowd is worth thousands, I MEAN it. I am doing the arithmetic, not flattering you.
The blog market is TOUGH. I LIKE it.
Hurricane Katrina was a landmark that, as usual, no one noticed. It was the first time in history that foreign aid was a major factor in an AMERICAN disaster.
Historically it was the United States that provided aid when disaster struck, even the nan-made Civil War disaster in the Ukraine and Russia in the areas that the Communists controlled in the early twenties, when a man named Herbert Hoover ran the effort. Until New Orleans, ALL such aid was one-way, at least since the saving of Jamestown in 1609.
But when blacks took over New Orleans, it ceased to be what was historically known as an AMERICAN disaster. It became a minority area disaster.
Katrina was a window on the “no whites” future dreamed of by “anti-racists.”
There is, if your mind is broad, a connection between almost every subject, each discussed briefly and alone, in BUGS. I have repeatedly made the point that no one in this generation knows what starvation really IS.
Jane Fonda, who of course was raised in poverty in her father’s house, is constantly talking about starvation.
You may have noticed that not one of the endless “public service ads” demanding private donations for colored countries EVER mentions the word “starvation” any more.
They simply show what wretched conditions the average child in a colored country has to live in. New Orleans was simply this world phenomenon coming to America.
When the colored world includes Europe and America, we will once again learn what the word starvation REALLY means.
But this changeover is not recognized because all people want to talk about is the latest news. When I was young the debate was about how fast each country’s economy was growing. The brilliant Intellectuals and Idealists of the USSR were “catching up” with the United States.
Note the term “catching up.” The United States at that time had 2.3% annual REAL increase in PER CAPITA income. The only debate was about how much faster other countries were catching up.
According to Soviet figures, the USSR was coming on fast.
That was the WHOLE debate back then, how fast America was GROWING compared with the “centrally planned economies” and Germany and Japan.
Once again, the least noticed thing that has changed is the thing that has changed MOST.
All of the old assumptions about GROWTH have been dead for over a generation.
In other words, the predictions of us racists stopped being PREDICTIONS decades ago.
We predicted a decline, but as a matter of simple arithmetic we will learn to take stagnation for granted and then we will learn not to notice decline.
Why should we apologize for being right?
We said that the decline of the white race meant stagnation and then decay.
We were dead right.
Everything is right on schedule.
New Orleans is tomorrow.
It is impossible to keep count, but at least half of the environmental catastrophe’s today are the result of environmentalism. Species got out of control so another species was imported to control the problem and this new type is even more out of control.
People see this all the time but they don’t THINK about it.
I ran into this phenomenon in my early teens, when I had already had history courses year after year talking about the civilization of the Middle East and how each was overrun by a Northern invasion, the how Ionian Greeks were Northern invaders and then Ionia was overrun by the Dorians and how they were taken over by the Macedonians and so on, then how Rome fell to barbarians from the north, and so forth.
So after about five consecutive immersions in this, I said, “History is a series of Northern invasions.”
And all the kids who had been in each of those classes with me stared at me like I had a tulip growing out of my nose and said, “DUHH??”
Likewise, somewhere about halfway along describing an environmental crisis, the narrator briefly mentions it is a result of an earlier environmental attempt at the Final Solution to a problem years earlier.
Hence this extended introduction. If you note that I tend to repeat things, please remember my experience with the DUHH?? Syndrome.
An anti-immigration group in Germany insists that integration, assimilation, is the solution. They mean it is the Final Solution, but they can’t say that.
So if you realize the last generation of environmentalism has caused most of our present environmental problem, it is easy to see how the last generation of opposition to genocide has bred the present genocide.
Taken together, all the assimilationist groups in all the white countries come down to the end of the white race in general. It leads to “the only real solution,” meaning the only Final Solution, “is THE mixing of THE races.”
But “The races” only means the white race. No one is allowed to point out that the REASON Germany must bring in and assimilate tens of millions of colored is because Germany is WHITE. This is an assumption that is so taken for granted that no one mentions it.
Historically pretty well al final solutions imposed as a reaction to a problem have gone on to become greater problems themselves. Nazism itself was a reaction to rise of Bolshevism and the Depression.
It should be part of human wisdom that when any gigantic movement goes out to crush every trace of some problem, it will itself eventually go so far as to create an opposite problem.
The transition of anti-racism to be being simply anti-white was perfectly predictable. There is a lesson to be learned from it.
One good lesson it should teach is how stupid and impenetrable people are when it comes to something popular.
There was a discussion of another book talking about Jefferson’s relationship with his female slave. Ben Stein’s father was a law professor at the University of Virginia, so he dared to defend Marse Tom. He pointed out that the DNA showed he OR one of his male kin fathered the kids.
Of the four discussants one remained silent for the whole half hour. He was the black one. At the end he stated that he hadn’t read the book, and he had only come on the program for one reason, to point out that the female slave was under age and Jefferson was also a child molester.
Nobody showed any surprise. I doubt anybody expected him to read the book.
Back when Jessie Jackson became a candidate for the Democratic nomination and the first debate was coming on, the other candidates OPENLY expressed their concern that if they came on strong they might make a complete fool of him.
But on the other hand, they couldn’t afford to be too patronizing.
This is the attitude of whites towards blacks, and it varies surprisingly little. What makes the difference is not our real belief about the races, but our attitude toward the present perversion of morality whereby, if we’re good, everything whites have is somebody else’s.
That is supposed to represent Self-Sacrifice.
America elected a Negro president. That is, it elected a black guy who talked good and wore a suit, like Sidney Poitiers or Jackie Robinson.
There is a lot of discussion about how he has fallen short. The real explanation is that he isn’t too bright.
Ever since the World War I Betas, we have known that blacks do far better on verbal skills and worse on math or other abstracts. A critical difference in learning is that blacks learn more by ear than by eye.
In short, black guys can talk very well, dance very well, run very well, but they fall short in the department our president is now falling short in. They do a good show, but they are not bright.
The liberal formulae for reviving the economy, the New Deal way, have run out. Normally a president would do what one Democrat after another has done since WWII, he would change his policies.
We run into a problem here that no one dares recognize: Obama CAN’T change his thinking. He has not been doing any.
There is a giant difference between someone who is repeating a line because he believes it and one who repeats a line because he can’t conceive of any other. Clinton could THINK. Carter could THINK.
This is the problem with black elected officials. They don’t have CONCEPTS. They have SCRIPTS. This is racial, no matter how many baths the individual black takes or how well he dresses.
I see exactly what is happening. I suspect a lot of people do now. It has cost us trillions and it will cost us more trillions, but no price is too great to avoid saying what is obviously the case.
At first, BBC programs were on PBS. The accents were so think that Americans usually couldn’t keep up with them. To the British, these think accents were part of the humor. How one speaks was always a hallmark of one’s identity and one’s clahss.
With syndication into the vast American market, these unintelligible accents disappeared. Our British readers would know if there is still a lot of that there, but Monty Python English is as understandable to an American audience as is American programming.
But Monty Python tapes were almost wiped before they were discovered and sent to America. It is my impression that any British show that stood some chance of getting into this market dropped the heavy accents, just in case.
In the case of IQ studies and crime rates, we have the opposite situation. Thinking over my tens of thousands of exchanges with anti-whites, I came to realize that in almost every case there was no FACTUAL difference between what I thought and my opponent thought.
American thought on other races is, in many ways, amazingly homogenous. Barry Goldwater used to joke, “People think I hedge on integration. I am perfectly consistent on it. When someone brings it up, I always say, ‘Where are you FROM?’”
Now we have few regional differences in accent on this issue. A person who is one generation from white trash and has gotten a college degree will be as fanatically politically correct as the British middle class is class-conscious.
The upper and lower classes in Britain are not at all reserved. But the middle class is painfully so. There are exceptions, but you can fairly well make that a rule. Likewise, the way a person talks on race has to do with his background.
But there is very little real difference among Americans when it comes to how they see the races. That is one reason IQ and crime studies are no longer of much use. There was a time when only Southerners had any experience with blacks in general and Yankees believed that they were all whites with paint on their skin.
That time is now forgotten. Today, all Americans know that blacks are different. It is not that they don’t know it, it’s that, as a matter of political correctness, they must deny it as a matter of, if you will, courtesy.
When a pro-white compares black gyrations as animal, he is being evil. But his opposite number will believe deeply that blacks or Indians are not responsible for anything they do that is wrong. They regard blacks and Indians as innocent, and that innocence is of the animal type.
When someone says that we are whites claiming to be victims, it never occurs to us that that is as blatant a racist statement as ever came out at a Klan rally. Why? Because we agree with it. It is part of the pattern of thought of whites, so neither the left or the right sees it as anything else.
Anti-whites talk about minorities in exactly the same way that the ASPCA talks about puppies.
So do we.
When the Black Muslims were attacked by the FBI, they pronounced it “genocide.”
When it was found that the white man’s smallpox may have devastated Easter Island, it was called genocide.
Any use of genocide besides that in the Mantra, which describes the only real genocide going on earth, will be laughed at.
So when a charge is made of genocide against “white CHRISTIANS,” it will be put into the Joke Bin of Genocide. Christianity is not genetic. Religious decimation is a bad thing, but calling it genocide is exactly like calling pneumonia smallpox.
This always happens when you are spreading a hard, banned truth. It always gets a spin on it that makes it a lie. Only the hard truth itself WORKS. I have watched this happen every time I have gone through this process.
Interracial marriage is the Holy Grail of liberals and respectable conservatives. I must use Lord Nelson’s example again, because it is such a clear demonstration of how SUBTLE this disease is. As long as you get away from attacking Holy Assimilation, ALL the charges of heresy end.
So when Lord Nelson found there was less resistance to the idea of Europe “being overwhelmed,” even He unconsciously moved in the direction of lesser resistance.
But even respectable conservatives can talk about “being overwhelmed” while they talk about THE races, as if this were not a problem of our race alone.
What the petition to the UN about the “genocide” of “European Christians” shows is the pressure is on, the genocide everybody can see is beginning to cause rumbles. And the timing is not incidental.
But this petition to the UN has nothing to do with US. There will be plenty of people yelling “cultural genocide.” Every white nationalist party in Europe is going to come up with its variation. But all of them are going avoid the third rail.
The third rail, the one no one dares touch, consists of two parts. The first is the god of respectability, INTERRACIAL marriage. The second part is that this RACIAL assimilation is required ONLY of white countries and of ALL white countries.
To avoid this reality of genuine genocide, the people who have become “leaders” in the old situation will invent alternatives to RACIAL, like this “Christian” nonsense. The BNP says the only problem is the MOSLEM immigration.
And that is because the Moslems WON’T assimilate.
It is a bit tiresome to see commenters swooning over a complaint which has nothing to do with the Mantra. This is what respectables always do for the left, they make lots of noise, but they also change the subject.
It would be MUCH easier if we could just meld in with anything that sounds like the Mantra. But that is why respectable conservatives are so indispensable to everything bad that happens to us. They change the subject from one the enemy cannot deal with to one that it can deal with.
Get off the real, obvious genocide and slide over to religion or “being overwhelmed by immigration,” or religion, and you are on the enemy’s ground, and on that ground he has power to grind you right into the dust.
The only thing we have is that this is NOT cultural. This is not about “mixing THE races.” It is genocide aimed at whites and everybody, at some level, knows it.
Do not have anything to do with someone who tries to get some easy fix on the Mantra. Like respectable conservatives, they are an integral part of our racial enemies.
History is a description of what happened. How a game of Monopoly is as much history as the life of a Pharaoh or the SevenYears War. But a history teacher who only taught about monopoly games he had heard about might be criticized.
Why is this information produced? History was produced because it told the story leading up to the present. It was supposed to tell us mistakes we may have made, how today’s society was built.
History has changed as its “why” has changed. The idea now is to be fair. But if there is one thing history teaches us, it is that fairness is NOT what history is made up of. A history that tried to give Equal Opportunity to all things that happened in the past would by hard to fit into the universe.
Black studies are of little use to person who needs basics in how the society he actually lives in works. He may learn more about the Jabuda practiced in Central Africa than he does about branches of the Unites States Government, but what has he learned?
He has learned about something irrelevant. All Black History can be useful for is telling the old tale of why one group lost and another one defeated it. It could illustrate the fact that the world is unfair.
Marxism teaches that the world is only unfair because of a purely human trait called exploitation. It further teaches that exploitation is a purely human characteristic because human beings are the only animals who have territorial divisions, where one animal has more than another animal does, where a class system exists, all for the purpose of economic exploitation.
Every single one of these superstitions disappeared like smoke in the last half century.
Marxism says that all societies are alike, all are there to exploit the poor and hold them down. We have discovered that no animal society exists which does not exploit the poor and hold them down. In fact, our custom of letting each male have a female is less natural than that of Islam where the alpha owns all the females and any sex the other males have is likely to be with each other.
In the Communist Manifesto Marx declared the ultimate heresy of his time for Communism: “Women in common!” Even a conservative today would find that wording a bit sexist. Clearly women were part of the property that was being taken from the proletariat.
For Karl Marx, History is the Alpha and the Omega. His entire theory was that history goes in one direction, and is based on one imperative: human exploitation. Unlike any philosophy, Marxism HAS an Alpha and an Omega, a Beginning and an End. To a Marxist, “communism” has the same holiness about it that Heaven has to Christians or Paradise to the Jews who believe in it.
For a Communist to refer to anything existing today as “Communist” is exactly like the Pope referring to a place as, LITERALLY, Heaven. A Marxist always refers to a country ruled by Communists as a “socialist” country. It is on the way to a heaven, communism, but when it fails it gives the same excuse any other religion does, it was Imperfect.
Neither a Christian nor a Moslem nor a Marxist is discouraged by the millions of heresies that have failed.
History is a helpless field of study. Black History exists, not to explain anything anybody needs to know today, but to hire blacks and give blacks courses they can pass. The information is invented, sorry, produced, because there is a demand for it.
This is again what everybody knows but no one can say without being professionally ruined.
Everybody knows that, too.
Ben Franklin was born around 1705. When he set out to write his autobiography he was about my age. He set out to write it because, as said, his days were coming to an end.
He died fifteen years later, having been a member of the Constitutional Convention of the government he had helped to found. We all know why he didn’t finish his autobiography himself.
In the early 1770s, when a majority of the population didn’t reach the age of five, Franklin thought it was time for him to describe his life. He had invented the study and terminology of electricity, invented the Franklin Stove, invented bifocals and lightening rods and a number of other things each of which would have made him famous.
He was the only living American elected a Fellow of the Royal Society.
Ben had negotiated treaties with the Indians and with the Quakers, whom he despised, pretty well dominated Pennsylvania politics and, when he retired from real work, was chosen by four colonies to represent them in London.
Franklin was famous all over America.
But all those things above were his hobbies. He had grown rich as a publisher, he had done most of his own writing.
So when he sat down and took a deep breath in the early 1770s, he had plenty to write about.
But to those of us reading it today, his remark about coming to the end of his labors sound funny as hell.
I am flattered by some people really being concerned about my health when I talk about freezing and being tired. It is important to remember that Old Bob really is and has always been concerned with my race’s survival and in that struggle my own lifetime is not as much a preoccupation with me as it would be with normal folk.
You are important to me because the torch must eventually be passed. To someone obsessed with his own undying fame or being The Leader that would be a secondary concern.
So my talk about my passing is, as Twain said, much exaggerated. Believe me, if my health were bad you would know about it. We have things to do, and whether I am here or not affects the continuation of the fight my whole existence has been devoted to.
But if you want a report on the health of Robert W. Whitaker, Esquire, here it is:
I am healthy as a horse and damned near as smart.
I, too, have run into people who will argue that the only way to get rid of the race problem is intermarriage, they never say The Final Solution to the race problem, for some reason, and when I recite the Mantra they say they never heard of a race problem.
AFRICA FOR THE AFRICANS, ASIA FOR THE ASIANS, WHITE COUNTRIES FOR EVERYBODY!
“It is said that there is this RACE problem. They say this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours into EVERY white country and ONLY into white countries.”
“The Netherlands and Belgium are as crowded as Japan or Taiwan, but nobody says Japan or Taiwan will solve this RACE problem by bringing in millions of third worlders and quote assimilating unquote with them.”
“Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY white country and ONLY white countries to “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites.”
“What if I said there was this RACE problem and this RACE problem would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were brought into EVERY Black Country and ONLY into black countries?”
“How long would it take anyone to realize I’m not talking about a RACE problem? I am talking about the final solution to the BLACK problem?”
“And how long would it take any sane black man to notice this and what kind of psycho black man wouldn’t object to this?”
“But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against my race, the white race, Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that I am ANAZIWHOWANTSTOKILLSIXMILLIONJEWS.”
They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white.
“ANTI-RACIST IS A CODE WORD FOR ANTI-WHITE.”
You certainly can’t dispute the first sentence, so they begin with the second.
You could TRY “a problem called racism. This problem of racism will be solved…”
I predict that a new automatic “DUHHH!” will be invented right there, but you can try it.
Also, the Marxist answer to the Mantra is that once again someone is portraying white people as victims. It goes unanswered. Why doesn’t somebody besides me point out that for somebody to say that people with white skins can’t be victims is as racist a statement as anything Hitler ever said.
Most people have no idea of Marxist doctrine, and the onus will be on him to explain it.
There was an interesting discussion in General Comments, now 5, about the wording of the Mantra. One of the commenters has run into the usual problem of people saying they had never heard of a “race problem.”
The Mantra begins, “It is said there is this race problem,..” so naturally nobody ever heard of a race problem. I find this is normally the first reaction to almost anything.
For example, people use the term “since the invention of the wheel” as meaning the most primitive time. The comic strip B.C. supposedly takes place when snakes literally still had feet, before Genesis, and it treats the wheel as a new, the first, invention.
Until I point out that the wheel actually existed as a working device nowhere on earth but in Scythian Europe and for an indeterminate period in Asia. Now we find that Asians were also in contact with Aryans, and everybody has a different time that Egypt got the wheel.
But even accepted history, which insisted that everything including the opposable thumb was invented in the Middle East does not claim that they got the wheel there by any method but being run over by warriors in chariots.
But when I mention that it is interesting that the wheel is considered such an ancient invention, the person I am talking to gives me a look that could only appear on the face of an impossible mixture of a fish and a cow and says “DUHHHHH???”
Suddenly he has never heard anybody say that the wheel was a primitive invention.
Just so, the same person who said yesterday and many times before that the only solution to the race problem is intermarriage will, when you mention a race problem, give you that fish-cow look and say “DUHHHH????”
There are endless instances of this. I have seen people conclude a hundred times on television that the only true — they never say “final” solution to the race problem is intermarriage. If I bring up that conclusion, they will deny not only that they said it, but that they ever HEARD such a thing.
As you will see if you read Orwell’s 1984, you will find that those who control information also control how people think. So a person who normally talks about solving race problems with intermarriage will also deny that there IS a race problem. That is the way his mind has been trained to work.
You could ask the person if he honestly never heard of any race problem in the United States. But discussion is set up in such a way that you don’t usually get a chance, and if one of our people does get such a chance, they go off on the way THEY are taught to think, on black crime or whatever.
It took a long time and a lot of work to get us into this condition. It will take a long time and a lot of work to get us out of it.
Hitler joined the German Army and was a war hero, but he was not a German citizen.
It keeps being mentioned as an interesting sidelight that in his whole political career, he never got papers to make him a German, rather than an Austrian, citizen.
If he had run for office, maybe he would have had to be a German citizen to qualify. But he didn’t run for office. He put together a coalition in the Reichstag as a party leader and was appointed Chancellor. I don’t know if he EVER took citizenship papers.
This may have been a matter of principle. Hitler regarded all Germans, including those Woodrow Wilson gave to France and Czechoslovakia, as Germans. He did not need papers to be a German.
This was not an unusual attitude. There are a number of members of the British House of Commons today who do not hold British citizenship. They hold New Zealand or Australian passports. I don’t know whether anyone from outside the Commonwealth can do that, but it isn’t the BRITISH Commonwealth anymore.
Reading the old Agatha Christie novels, I enjoy the fact that Englishmen were still allowed to use the word “foreigners.” But no American was ever referred to or thought of as a “foreigner.” An Australian wasn’t a “foreigner,” he was an Australian.
Brits had an opinion of Americans and Australians exactly like their attitude towards others who carried the British passport. An Englishman had a definite attitude toward “Scots,” but would have been surprised if you put them into the category of Dagos or Krauts, as “foreigners.”
Nobody is ALLOWED to think that way now. But we still do. To a native American, meaning a real native American, a Brit is a Brit and a Mexican is a foreigner. A Mexican may take out citizenship, but nobody will tell you quicker than he will that he is a Mexican.
If he votes the welfare of Americans versus the welfare of illegal immigrants, as the Democrats point out in California, he votes for his fellow countrymen.
The term “nation of immigrants” is doubly absurd. ALL nations are nations of immigrants. ALL nations are built by immigration, and all nations are destroyed by immigration.
When the Emperor Claudius conquered Britain it was, like Gaul, a Celtic nation. Under Rome, like Gaul, it REMAINED a Celtic nation all the way up through Scotland in Ireland.
When the Romans left, much of Britain became England. The Anglo-Saxons came in and took the land over. Only with immigration did the new nation develop.
When William the Conqueror took over England, it remained England. Only a small number of Norman conquerors came in, as was the case with the Romans.
We can date the period when the Celtic population came into Britain the same way we can date the period when the Germanic Angles and Saxons came in. England became England when the nationhood of the Celts in that region was destroyed by immigration.
My ancestors came here and took this land from the Indians. Celts are not referred to as Native Englishmen, nor are the people the Celts took the land from before. The Celtic Nation in England was formed by immigration and destroyed by immigration.
There are Indians in Tierra del Fuego, at the southern tip of South America. They were Native Americans long before the Indians we drove out were here. To get from the Bering Strait to South America they had to have lived in what is now the United States for generations.
Tierra del Fuego is a LONG walk.
If there are any Native Americas, they are down there next to Antarctica. Nobody walks to the next thing to Antarctica and STAYS there voluntarily.
All nations are created by immigration, all nations are destroyed by immigration. Papers have nothing to do with it.
Conservatives are constantly bitching about how liberals are getting absolutely absurd in their use of the word “racist.”
One liberal’s advice they quote was, “Pick a conservative and cal him a racist.”
But the respectables never talk about WHY liberals are now so blatant about the racist label.
They use it because it WORKS.
And they will keep using it because it WORKS.
We have a simple truth to get across: “I wish for liberals to say I am a non-racist but the only reason they will say that is because I am a groveling wimp.”
Liberals use the anaziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews gambit all the time because it WORKS. Whenever they use it, conservatives soil themselves and go into a fetal position.
If you found something that did that to your opponents, you would use it endlessly, you would openly urge your allies to use it. Liberals kept using the racist label on the Tea Party and the Tea Party put out tapes of their meetings to show no one used the N word.
It didn’t help.
Hey, dumbo, this is a WAR, not a high school DEBATE! Unlike groveling respectables, liberals don’t give a damn about you proving them wrong. All that counts is whether they WIN or not.
That’s why they always win over the respectables. The only time conservatives won was when they got over their fear of appealing to the “the Wallace vote,” a phrase the left used to scare conservatives away from the Reagan Democrats for many years.
The Republicans went back to moderation with Bush and became habitual losers again, doing the job the media feels a real conservative SHOULD do.
When Republicans looked like they had some cajones again in 1994, they won BOTH Houses of Congress. But once in office, they danced to the tune of the Democratic attacks again, and lost it again.
Republicans who won the smashing victory of 1994 went Inside the Beltway. They were listening to the Washington Post and the cocktail party crowd, which cowed them with the racist and radical labels on a day to day basis.
Only on their trips back to their districts, talking with people who weren’t the Big Shots they now dealt with, did they hear, “Why aren’t you CHANGING anything up there?”
They didn’t change even the trend to more government up there because the Big Guys inside the Beltway are Big Guys because they know how to manipulate wimps.
And if you wet yourself and praise Martin Luther King ensconced in the idea that liberals were always right the pros are going to keep using any label that WORKS.
Philippe Rushton is one of the tiny band of psychologists, like Arthur Jensen, who bucks the Party Line on racial IQ. He talked to me because I have personally known the people he quotes like Henry Garret and Wesley George and Carleton Coon when he was in Junior High..
If I can’t impress them with my intelligence I can wow ’em with my longevity.
Rushton told me that Carleton Coon, already about middle-aged, did parachute jumps for American Intelligence in World War II. It was too bad I never knew that, because I could have looked at his file in a couple of my old jobs.
I talked with Coon a number of times and corresponded with him. He never told me a thing about jumping in WWII.
But this is not surprising. Here is a man who was a Harvard professor, Curator of the Museum of Natural History, head of the committee which set up the anthropology exhibits at the Smithsonian Institution, and president of the American Society of Anthropology until he was forced out because he would not subscribe to a resolution which repeated the “Modern anthropology has proven that all races are equal in innate abilities” which was then required, as “Race is a myth” is today.
That phrase was in Almanacs and even comic books, “Modern anthropology has proven that all races are equal in innate abilities.” The president of the Society and certainly the world’s top physical anthropologist said that was nonsense.
You can see why he didn’t mention his WWII experiences to me. He had had a hell of a life before and after.
On the other end of the scale, I remember one of Mike Hammers or the fifty other Bulldog Drummonds and other Tough Detectives that were popular in the 50s describing himself at the beginning, the usual tough, big, non-nonsense and so forth and this sentence, and a broken nose I got in the War, not in the police action.”
At our recovery club, a group of full-time World War II vets expressed the same belittling attitude to Korean vets.
They were the opposite of Carleton Coon. They were lifetime drunks for whom the War was the only highpoint of their lives.
I noted that they poo-pooed people who fought in Korea, but they never said one word of the kind about the equally undeclared war in Vietnam.
Why? Because there were no Korean War vets there and there were a lot of Nam vets.
This was typical Paper Hat Bravery, the bravery of the guys who ran around in paper army hats and bragged about how they had fought a War Against Racism.
I read an article lately that talked about something it made me remember. Those who fought in the Pacific, like my uncles, did not talk about it. They fought longer and with a lot more casualties, but they also seem to REMEMBER it.
The Paper Hat Heroes all think of themselves as John Wayne portrayed them. For decades all they heard was how they had ended the Holocaust and Saved the World.
The Pacific fighters are reminded that, in its racial fury, America used the A-Bomb twice in Japan. Until I read that article, it hadn’t occurred to me what a total, chiasmic difference that made in veterans of the same war.
The full time vets have had no lives since and their idea of their own history is a pure product of the media.
My commenters are very good to me. If you ever get tired of all that praise of me, think of it this way: Why would anyone take the trouble to participate in BUGS if he didn’t think it was very good. There are, literally, millions of blogs out there.
So when I use a comment as a starting point, I sound like I am criticizing someone who said something good about me. I appreciate the good stuff, I have an ego like anybody else. More important, like every human being, I need encouragement.
Look at what Ben Franklin said about the raw ego it takes to write an autobiography in the Introduction to HIS autobiography.
So one commenter came to my defense in criticizing another for talking about how I should live a long time. I appreciate his coming to my defense, damned few people ever did in my career. But it gives me a chance to talk about his point.
The guy who said I could live long was referring to an article where I mentioned my own death. I do it a lot. So someone who says, “Long may you wave” gets my appreciation, while most people don’t want the subject mentioned.
The writer who waved the caution sign about mentioning my death also went on to make dead accurate observations about me, how I am worried to death about not having people to carry on my THINKING. I keep talking about how Doctor Pierce said on his deathbed that no one alive could take his place in the leadership.
After all, he was talking about courtesy to normal people, and no one here confuses me with normal.
I will be frozen when I pass on. Everybody in my family had to agree not to oppose it, they have since agreed to insist on it, but none of them like it. If you know about the Ted Williams case, you can check the web, one daughter suddenly decided to make the papers by opposing his being frozen, and the legal case made his freezing cost ALCOR a mint.
My family always says I don’t know what will happen when I am frozen. My thinking is that I know EXACTLY what will happen to THEM if they’re NOT frozen.
Actually my being frozen is like BUGS and all the rest of my political life. It’s a lottery ticket. I am a hell of a lot surer about sharing my ideas this way than I am about being frozen. In both cases, I am spending a lot of effort and money on faith.
No one really does anything useful on a sure bet. The only people who do that are politicians looking forward to the next election, which is just MORE of a sure shot.
There are million politicians, but what I do is critical PRECISELY because it is a bet on the future.
How could someone like me, who has had so much power from probabilities, NOT decide on freezing?