Archive for May, 2011
I wrote an article repeating another couple of Whitakerisms, but it is up to Brian to decide when it should go in.
Whitakerisms are of course Mantra Thinking. If you tap on the new thing “Whitakerisms” on the right of this page, you will see that some 23 comments came in citing these statements of boiled down reality from over 4,000 of my articles here.
You will see that many of the commenters reminded us of some of these statements, and others hunkered down with them and chewed over exactly what kind of thinking this is. That, of course, is the real goal of this whole seminar, and it was a good exercise.
So please don’t allow the Whitakerisms thread to die until I stir it up from time to time.
This leads us to another Whitakerism. I have repeatedly pointed out that a capitalized word is always the exact opposite of the real word: capitalized Truth always means The Only True Faith which grinds simple truth under its heel; the classic example of Mercy is when the Inquisition burned people slowly to death in order to get them to repent and avoid the eternal fire of Hell.
A major part of understanding history is seeing the oppositeness of the exact same word, with only the first letter in the upper case.
When you understand that, you are ready to see why I reject with horror the idea of A, repeat, ONE Whitakerism, but I am discussing Whitakerisms.
Whitakerism are short and useful to you for putting into your thoughts a framework. A Whitakerism would be a book telling you WHAT you should CONCLUDE. A Whitakerism would be a road I built, as they say, with good intentions.
Each Whitakerism tells you a lot of roads, Wordist roads, lead to nowhere. If I am good at this, it may very useful as a compass is.
A compass is indispensable if you know how to use it, but it will never tell you where to go.
So click on Whitakerisms and see if it reminds you of useful points I’ve made in low these many years.
We may have a winner.
I made a couple of suggestions for a new name for GC-7. Some commenters loyally said they were pretty good, and they were right, War Room or Battling Outside BUGS would do in a crunch. But they are too contrived.
More important, they don’t come from INSIDE BUGS.
I keep saying that a winning strategy EVOLVES. GC-7 itself is a pure EVOLUTION. As the name implies, it is a place to put in thoughts which may have been inspired by my articles, but were so far off track that they would lead comments off of the article itself.
Over a half a century of political strategizing has made it second nature for me to try and then, what DEVELOPES, and then, instead of trying to get it back on my game plan, to adapt my game plan to what is going on.
So my two suggested titles may have been artificial, even War Room is I think stolen from a cable network, but I had to do SOMETHING to get you going.
Now a commenter in GC-7 has rolled out the term “BUGS Swarm.”
It is original, it is OURS, and I think it’s great!
I can almost see one of us as a bee who comes back and reports to the other bees through his body movements how to go get the honey, or maybe the person or bear who is a threat to the hive.
I am also very happy because it is original and it came from YOU.
I am fascinated by the Mantra strategic thinking going on.
Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.
The problem is that, when something that has happened before in earlier societies occurs in our present we do not see it as the Same Old Thing. It is Here and Now.
Spengler is known for his theory of the rise and fall of civilizations, but, IF YOU KNOW WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING FOR, you will find the exact same theme in each succeeding country that is now brown and dead.
We al talk about how Political Correctness is becoming more and more like the Inquisition, and its Protestant equivalents.
The problem is that no one who says this thinks about it.
Recently two top experts largely discredited the Global Warming hysteria when their email correspondence revealed they made up their results as they went along.
When blacks working for the Washington Post and the New York Times respectively completely made up their news, it was a small scandal. One was only exposed because her series was up for a Pulitzer!
No problem. They just got caught, but they were doing it for the True Religion.
But no one sees all this the way, as a simple repeat of obvious history. In each society the priesthood eventually crowds a out all logic and all scientific advancement.
But no one in each society sees it simply as a repeat of the old story, because, like Political Correctness, the NEW priesthood is on today’s headlines or is the latest news in Rome, not connected with hoary old history books.
This is a Whitakerism: There is nothing new about our new religion. Unless you an readjust your thinking to realize the simple reality, you will miss the boat as every other country which was once in the forefront of the world and is now just another brown and stagnant backwater did.
The Whitakerism here is: They are not ALIKE, they are the SAME.
That is where “Political Correctness is not LIKE a religion, it IS a religion,” comes from.
There is a absolutely no difference between those who expect “scientists” to warp everything to come to the right conclusion and the Curia which condemned Galileo.
Marxism states that truth is a political matter. This is EXACTLY the same as the Old Religion, which said that what Galileo saw and could show the Curia, was false because the Will of God said it could not be true.
Western science finally managed to cast off the abortion that was built up in the name of Christ and today’s science is unprecedented. But this struggle was barely won by science in an all-white society.
We are not doing something “new.” We are establishing a priesthood, becoming a brown people. We are doing EXACTLY what all the others did before.
Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.
Someone wrote me an email entitled “race mixing” and told me he had trouble with the argument that caramel colored children might be superior.
I have pointed out here at least twenty times that this has nothing to do with race mixing. If you use those two words, you have already lost the argument for the Mantra.
This is NOT race mixing. This is aimed entirely at white countries, and it is aimed at there being no WHITE race.
For God’s sake, gang, LISTEN!
Until I finally got some responses to my piece saying to counter the “There are no white countries” argument by simply pointing out that THEY define “white countries” by the fact that they single out EVERY white country and ONLY white countries for their “race mixing” or “assimilation” and for third world immigration.
The responses indicated you had some trouble with white countries.
You could alter the Mantra by saying “white MAJORITY countries.”
This is not a condemnation. The problem is this whole approach is a new way of looking at things. You will have as much trouble as anyone else in changing your whole thinking. I have been sitting here doing that for years, with your help.
But you have to do a lot of intellectual work to get your mind out of the present rut, just the way you are trying to get the other side to do it.
This is the difference between knowing that gravity exists and Newtonian Physics as an explanation for the movements of the entire universe. In getting rid of this “race mixing” nonsense, you are pointing out gravity.
But in order to really be a BUGSter, you will have to change your thinking, like Newtonian Physics had to change its entire view of the universe.
I keep explaining that our information is presently produced for every reason except the simple truth.
In order to change the world, we must see it in an ENTIRELY new light.
I am always terrified that enthusiasm may run out in GC 7.
I was in seventh heaven reading comments on my piece, “It is Time for Heresy!”
At age 70, I finally have my army!
The comments on the Heresy article and in GC7 are a dream come true for me.
At last, here is a group of people who don’t wander off into the News and Jews and general declarations. AT LAST, here is a group of pro-whites who are doing what I did ALONE for so long: explaining the simple TRUTH.
The trick is that there is nothing simple about it.
Just as there is nothing less “common” than common sense, there is nothing that is less simple than simple truth.
Even my many enemies admit that I am highly intelligent and have been there and done that, but I am still discovering new “common sense” ideas and new “simple truths” every DAY.
I have met many, many geniuses like William Shockley, who invented the transistor, and every one of them sounds like he just arrived on Planet Earth yesterday. They are always talking breathlessly about a new idea they have run into.
These real geniuses couldn’t be less like the popular idea of a Scholar, Mommy Professor’s Intellectual.. The Scholar is pictured as repeating Aristotle or Ancient Wisdom or Political Correctness. Real intellectuals are the exact opposite.
Our comments on “It is Time for Heresy” and GC7 are the same way.
No one is trying to impress anybody. There are no big words.
One thing that is funny is that we all look down on Conspiracy mongers.
But, in the truest sense of the word, we ARE a Conspiracy. We are in cahoots and in collusion.
We are a conspiracy to tell the truth.
And it IS a conspiracy. We are getting together and conspiring about how to change the world. That is the very definition of a conspiracy.
After all, the “secrets” of white advancement have always been so simple no one could figure them out. The Romans found that a hundred men who acted as a unit could defeat any number of men attacking randomly.
The “secret” of Western science is that one takes a basic idea and follows it with a rigidity no Eastern philosopher can even imagine. Newton took gravity and explained the universe, but it was because he excluded everything BUT gravity.
Face it, gang, YOU are the only REAL, WORKING Conspiracy around
I routinely point out to anti-whites that “He’s one of YOUR guys. He HATES whites.”
Please note that this is not pointed as a historical fact about Bob’s life or as a theoretical musing.
I am saying “IT WORKS, dammit. USE it!”
It is the SOP of respectable conservatives to insult and let liberals insult us, while they wax very near the border of homosexuality in their worship of leftists.
Why in the HELL are WE doing the respectables’ jobs for them?
Anyone whose program is to get the white race off the face of the earth, whether by libertarian open borders or Marxist demands for Black Power, is anti-white.
When did THEY ever hesitate to use the word Hate for an attitude hostile to the existence of another race?
I have seen it works, so I get it in there, “He is on YOUR side, he HATES whites.”
This puts them on the defensive. Anyone who advocates the end of his race SHOULD be on the defensive. But conservatives and the Weakest Generation have given US the habit of treating these walking abortions as if they were human.
The Baptist preacher who sees All Mankind as having the right to be in all white countries is as much my enemy as any screaming Maoist Commie.
But it is our habit to yell at the Commie and treat the Reverend like he means well.
They are the same until THEY prove they are not.
I hope I don’t have to go to the Moron Minimum here. The Moron Minimum is where someone will point out a guideline like the one I just did and then add, “But you don’t drive them off by screaming at them or calling them names.”
The Moron Minimum is when a speaker proposes something and then asks “Is it perfect?”
If I had put that into a speech for John Ashbrook he would have seriously questioned my sanity.
When you say “Is it perfect?” you are saying “What you would ask me is ‘Is this perfect?’”
No sane adult is going to ask any human being whether something he proposes is perfect.. It is like saying, “This is as simple as saying two plus two. Now, being ignoramuses, you are going to ask me how much is two and two.
“Two and two is FOUR!”
The Moron Minimum is something you do not accuse adults of not knowing.
About the time we developed speech, older men began to be asked to explain things.
The old men were more and more worthless as they aged for hunting or any of the practical things. They found that they became indispensable as they began to EXPLAIN things.
And nobody Googled them.
Why is this information produced?
The old men began to pour out explanations. They could name the gods from whose spittle the universe got its beginning. They could give you the True Explanation for everything.
Any old man who said “I don’t know” was risking his reason for existence. The moment anyone asked a basic Whitakerism: “Why was this information produced?” one has a whole world view of intellectual history.
History makes it very complicated. The first old men asked these questions evolved into shamans, priests, philosophers, Intellectuals, Authorities, and Mommy Professors. One thing we become aware of is that the Truth of today will not be Truth of tomorrow. But the explanation, as usual with Whitakerisms, is so basic and simple that no one dwells on it.
Least of all the shamans, priests, philosophers, Intellectuals, Authorities and Mommy Professors.
This information is produced for different markets in each generation. And each generation is absolutely convinced that Truth has been EVOLVING to the Ultimate Truth.
Which means the Truth you have now. In every generation, people use the term “modern thought” without the slightest idea how ridiculous that makes them.
And this is where we are stuck until we question the process itself.
But the moment you SEE the process for what it is, you begin to laugh out loud when someone says “modern thought.” Where do you BEGIN to contradict someone who says “The sky is purple?”
People will openly express rage at your “questioning their most deeply held beliefs.” But if questioning their most deeply held beliefs is offensive, a Whitakerism is declaring those “modern” beliefs to be totally absurd.
Whitakerisms make you very unpopular. One is making it clear that what people call “Their most deeply held beliefs” are actually as silly as the population in The Emperor’s New Clothes.”
No one is comfortable around you. You have totally abandoned the usual discussion of Both Sides, even radicals on Both Sides, all of whom think and talk about their “sides” on modern thought that is presently being discussed.
So Creator in Iceland is getting the Silent Treatment.
Get used to it.
Some of us have become fond of the title General Comments 7 simply because it was developed right here, it is OUR thing.
I always worry that I will look one day and GC7 will have died down.
I want you out there fighting the fight. What is going on is, after all these years, just too good to be true.
I have something to look forward to every day. I LEARN from what you say in GC7 in a way I never had a chance to do before. You are out there TRYING THINGS OUT, nose to nose with the enemy.
No longer must I BEG people to PLEASE get out there and TRY something besides News and Jews preaching at our own choir. Finally, at the age of seventy, this dream has come true.
I don’t want to press my luck here. When you have fought this long and this hard and a break like this occurs, you get SUPERSTITIOUS.
But the whole point of GC7 is battling OUTSIDE our own ranks.
I thought of “Battling Outside BUGS” before I realize it comes out BOB.
So I am proposing that we rename GC7 “Battling Outside BUGS.”
The irony is that General Comments was originally named as a place where you could put discussions of things that were not related to the articles, general thoughts that occurred to you. But it was GC7 that developed into our main purpose.
That is the way things have evolved, and as you know, my years of experience have told me that something which evolves is better than sticking to any rigid planning if you want something to WORK.
Speaking of the way things really work, I would also like to know what is going on in Iceland. The last I heard our leader there was getting the silent treatment.
Don’t let a slowdown after a big beginning bother you.
It is easy to assume that movements that have succeeded in history are continuous. We see history in retrospect as a plan moving in a steady direction. I the real world it is amazing how uneven things are. One of the first things you learn in an election campaign is how it all seems to die out or fall apart during the months people on the outside think it is grinding along on a schedule.
My interest in Iceland leads me to make the general point: ebb and flow, not organized conspiracy, is the essence of real political history.
Instead of getting into nitpicks about how they have no problem defining blacks versus whites, think out of the box ,THINK inside BUGS logic.
They are going to make the world happy by making everybody forget all those divisions and turn them into Christians or Marxists or Greens or Buddhists or New Wave or Pentecostal and once a particular book, and only one book, is accepted perfectly by every man, all will be well in the New Word.
Just how high an IQ does it take to realize that we have been wiping out religions, races, peoples, species of people, every kind of knowledge that didn’t fit, the wrong shaman, Blood Relics, Pol Pots, Scientific Marxism, Lysenko’s proof that summer wheat adapts in the snow, every one which demanded an end to whites?
So they come up with another formula for perfection which requires that whites must disappear.
And this one form of genocide binds them all together, To be a Loyal American you must demand an American that is brown. A GOOD FRENCHMAN says he loyal to anyone who speak French,
And the Good Frenchman joins with the Good Briton to force Iceland to be brown.
But the Good Frenchman and the GOOD Briton does not insist on massive third world immigration into Vietnam. There is no Great Self-Hatred for a Briton or a Frenchman to scream “racism” at in any Asian country.
So we all know what a white country is. It is land we are all perfectly aware of where Germans, Britons and other sleezes like self-declared French Idealists will be ended by genocide.
One main thing respectable conservatives get paid for is FORGETTING.
McCarthyism is a term seldom used today, but the fact is that everybody McCarthy called a Communist WAS a Communist.. When the USSR fell, the titanic KGB files were opened up. Even the ones Buckley denied were Communists turned out to be right there.
Our local liberal newspaper, it belongs to a chain, had a front page article announcing that Alger Hiss, the one Nixon caught, had NOT been found in the files.
Then he was.
Conservatives have long since stopped mentioning this. It is too embarrassing to liberals, and not being too embarrassing to liberals is what makes one respectable.
On the other hand, when German files were opened at the end of World War II, every newspaper in America would have welcomed word that people like Lindbergh were Nazi agents.
No way, Jose, Errol Flynn either.
We keep getting called Nazis, but the only claims that were ever PROVEN were that American leftists worked as freely with the Communists as the most fanatical McCarthyite would have claimed.
Lately highly redacted intelligence reports have shown that Ted Kennedy was working with the Reds on a number of fronts.
If you hold your breath until respectable conservatives even MENTION that you will suffocate.
Respectable conservatives are busy calling US Nazis.
It astonished me when the X-Files had Darren McGaven playing an old FBI agent who said “Of COURSE there were Communists in the State Department, HUNDREDS of them.” The whole episode turned on the fact that the reason they were NOT found out was because the Aliens didn’t want them to be!
This is a secret only kept by respectable conservatives.
In fact I once explained what happened to all the John Birch and McCarthyite Communists charges of the 1950s. In the 1960s, they went public. In the Radical Sixties, all the Communists came out and in anti-Vietnam rallies carried the Viet Cong banner.
You would have played hell before finding an America First rally in 1940 carrying a swastika.
Jane Fonda praised Communism as did the rest of the “anti-War” spokesmen.
There is a difference between being against the American entry into World War II and carrying a swastika in wartime. There is a difference between opposing an undeclared war and carrying the banner in American streets under which American soldiers are being killed.
But no respectable conservative will ever mention it.
A white farmer in Zimbabwe died recently from head injuries from an attack on him and his family while he was practically the only white farmer trying to hold onto his land in the Zimbabwe court system.
Other white farmers just left when the government took and divided up their land. His wife and children, some badly injured, are limping out of the country with the rest of the whites who settled there generations ago.
This incident reminds me of the summation of the Dred Scot Decision of 1857, which was “A black man has no rights under the (US) Constitution that a white man need respect.” A white man has no rights under the present Zimbabwe Constitution that a black man need respect.
U.S, law specifically denies refugee status to any white person in South Africa no matter how he is treated.
Under US immigration law, no South African white has any rights that a black South African need respect.
US immigration law states that Africa is for the Africans.
The Thirteenth Amendment only says that slavery was illegal. It freed the slaves, which was a big deal at the time.
A VERY big deal at the time.
From December, 1965 to July of 1868, the status of blacks under the Dred Scot Decision was the official Federal position. The fourteenth amendment’s ratification was false, but the fact of the matter I that, after July 20, 1868, when Seward declared it was ratified, it was ENFORCED.
All bullshit aside, the United States Constitution consists of what is ENFORCED. When the Federal Courts decided in 1834 that a major part of Georgia still belonged to the Indians, President Jackson said “The Supreme Court has made its decision, now let it ENFORCE it.”
And that was the end to the Indians’ claim to half of Georgia., an area as large as ALL of South Carolina.
There is a Whitakerism here, a point that is so absolutely part of our thinking that it is unnoticed.
No one will notice the basic point. People will be scurrying to Google to argue whether the land involved was the number of square miles I have specified. They will ignore the reality:
The Courts have not changed their ruling since 1834. They have accreded the fact that, in the end, all that matters is what President Jackson chose to ENFORCE.
Indian tribes have been given many, many MANY concessions, especially under Political Correctness. But, since 1834, Indian tribes have no rights under the Constitution that white people MUST respect.
History is a natural part of any discussion of policy.
But in regular policy talk, no one is allowed to talk about alternative history.
What is ridiculous about this is that alternative history is exactly what you are talking about. If you accept predetermination, it is ridiculous to talk about alternative policies.
You ARE discussing alternatives histories, the alternative history that will be if one or the other policy is adopted.
This assumption is not new. It was in the Confessions and On The Predestination Of The Saints by St. Augustine. You know it from John Calvin: It is called Predestination.
In the 1930s W.E. Woodward, a master of common sense, referred to Marxists as “economic Calvinists.”
Once again, what I am talking about is a pure Whitakerism:
I am pointing out a reality that is so obvious and so BASIC that no one else would NOTICE it.
Using a term like social progress means you believe in predestination. Predestination can be biblical or it can be claimed as Scientific History like that of Marx which is based on the early Victorian version of the past.
If the future can be different, then the past could have been different. Which means it is not only wrong to use a term like “political progressive,” it is insane. But, like Political Correctness, this terminology has become so much a part of our daily discussion, via Mommy Professor, that we cannot think of talk without it.
No progressive would hesitate to discuss how much Greener the world might have been had the ballots in Florida been less confusing in 2000.
It is an embarrassing and little-discussed fact, but until May 8, 1945, Germany operated under the Weimar Constitution.
After the Reichstag Fire the Reichstag put the emergency clause in the Weimar Constitution into effect.
The only reason the Weimar Constitution is no longer in effect is because Germany lost World War II.
I wrote a piece about Militant Obedience.
No matter how many words you cover it with, the only LOGICAL difference between Lincoln’s new Constitution declared in the Gettysburg Address and Hitler’s Weimar Constitution is that Lincoln won and Hitler lost,
We DO NOT want to get derailed on this fact, but it IS a fact.
It is a simple fact of life that the parameters of ANY discussion of public affairs are set by who won.
This is not even mildly disputable. If, as Buchanan discusses in his book, Britain had not gone nuts and declared war on Germany when Germany AND Russia invaded Poland, all of our public discussion would have an entirely different twist.
Germany would have been able to invade Russia, an aim Hitler had announced in Mein Kampf in the 1923.
Please note that I am NOT discussing anything specific about alternative history, which is subject to debate. All I am saying is that any alternative history would have produced an alternative DEBATE. History COULD have been different.
No one has any trouble with the simple fact that history COULD have been different.
I am talking about an equally indisputable fact: If history had been different, all the “reasonable discussion” we see professional commentators engage in would be unrecognizable.
If Englishmen and Americans had not been killed off by Churchill and Roosevelt, Hitler would have had Stalin all to himself. Ideally, the two dictators would have worn each other out, but in the long run, in a one-to-one match up, the USSR would probably have been beaten.
Now imagine the “reasonable debate” in the post-War years.
Germany would have had nuclear weapons. It would be the Lindbergh faction who would have bumper stickers saying “Better Nazi Than Dead.”
The left would have been made up entirely of nuke crazies.
The Declaration of Independence was a propaganda document.
It was Declaration written in a period of full scale war.
No one takes the bulk of it seriously, where everything is blamed on the King. Everyone at the Convention had lived under English law their whole lives, and they knew very well that the King could not do the things he was accused of without Parliament.
But there is only one short sentence of criticism for the Parliament. That’s where our sympathizers were, a minority, though a strong one.
Not one delegate, including Jefferson who wrote it, took the phrase from French liberals, “All men are created equal,” seriously.
Most people don’t know the difference between the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.
America has only adopted one statement which summarizes what America exists for: “To secure the blessings of Liberty for ourselves and our Posterity.”
If you trying to write the most total rejection of “a nation of immigrants” you possibly could, that is what you say.
The Gettysburg Address was delivered by a President who declared martial law during his reelection campaign. There was no question in Lincoln’s mind that he was declaring a Revolution” “dedicated to the principle that all men are created equal.”
How many men would have fought for the Union if they were informed that they were not fighting for the unity of their homeland, not even for the good of their own children, but for one single proposition?
In 1857 the Supreme Court wrote a book-length decision, Missouri versus Dred Scot, which went into detail about how America was founded and dedicated to white people: “A black man has no rights under the Constitution that a white man need respect.”
The Gettysburg Address was a war measure.
Just as the Declaration of Independence was a war measure.
Literate grown men in 1776 did not declare something as absurd as “all men are created equal” without a really good excuse.
Literate grown men in 1776 did not say “I want to kill Englishmen” at just any time.
So, until the Gettysburg Address, America was officially established to ensure a future for our white children.
The revolution to a propositional state is only valid if you accept the military dictatorship that enforced it.
This nation IS dedicated to a proposition, and it is eleven words long.
Here is another thing that happens to all of us but we do not THINK enough about it.
We start talking to someone about a problem they have, and as we talk, they tell us the problem with each bit of advice. At the END of this process, we finally come up with the thing we realize is exactly what we SHOULD have told them at the beginning.
Once again, here is something that happens to all of us, like hearing the Emperor’s Clothes, but we drown that experience in News and Jews and Puppy Dog Tales.
You have just spent half an hour finally realizing exactly what the problem is, and the solution is boiled down to a sentence or two, which you keep repeating lamely at the ends until you can end the talk.
This is what happens to every person who has to learn to write effectively.
I sit down with something buzzing around in my mind and try to express it the way I thought of it. You feel like it’s all worked out but it just won’t come out on paper.
Ever heard anybody say THAT before:
“I had it all worked out but it wouldn’t come out on paper.”
I would bet good money you have heard YOU say that.
The idea worked out beautifully when the images were in your own mind, in the language you use with yourself.
I used to have an idea wonderfully worked out. In fact I had it so clear in my mind that it was a BORE to write it down. It was a BORE, it was WORK to force it onto the paper.
Then something awful happened.
The clear idea I had had in my own mind was no longer something I could see in my mind, where I can hop around in my own images.
I didn’t know where to start. If the concept is in your mind, you have all the exciting running around in your own head, but when you hit the keyboard, it is clunk, clunk, clunk, just one sentence after another.
It becomes WORK, and you get confused and tired. And when you have been forcing yourself back to that damned keyboard over and over and you are exhausted, you might come up , after hours of work, with a sentence that expresses what you really needed at the beginning.
You are exhausted.
You are sick of it.
And you have finally written your first sentence.
It only happened once and I honestly believe that nobody but me remembers it.
Maybe forty years ago, a group of Professional Commentators were sitting around in a Panel on national television. There was the usual set of liberals and a token Buckleyite.
A person called in and said, “But you are all saying the same thing!”
I can’t quote what was really important:
Their reaction to that statement.
All of these Professional Experts from Both Sides had a look on their faces that reminded me of the look two Medieval Theologians would have expressed if they had been having a debate about the Will of God and were immediately caught by their audience resting up from their labors in their favorite bawdy house.
The rest of the program consisted of these commentators reassuring each other that they were ALL very, very different and very, very DIFFERENT.
Their situations were very similar to that of the Medieval Theologians of different Orders. All commentators have developed opinions that are different enough to be JUST RIGHT. The Brothers in the bawdy house have dedicated their lives to developing fine points of theology that stay away from heresy and yet disagree to an extent that is JUST RIGHT.
But the whole JUST RIGHT is blown to hell when they are found with the whores. Their lives were devoted to subtle distinctions among The Righteous, and getting caught with wine in one hand a professional female’s breast in the other is like setting a bomb off in a small wooden house.
That one incident, and the REACTION to it, was a sort of confirmation of everything I devoted my life to.
And like every other Whitakerism, there is absolutely nothing new about it.
In the Emperor’s New Clothes, a story every peasant knew, everyone was warned that His Majesty would only look naked to those who were Subtle or Holy or Intellectual enough to see the clothes through this Illusion of the Ignorant.
Everybody KNOWS the story, but no one ever RECOGNIZES it when it is played right in front of them.
There is no Wordism called Whitakerism. In fact, what we SHOULD have is the precise opposite.
From a very hard and dedicated lifetime, I have developed some basic truths that bear my marks.
The Mantra is an essence of a Whitakerism:
1) There is not a big word in it.
Except maybe anaziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.
2) It is no absolutely no longer than it has to be.
3) What it expresses is so obvious that nobody sees it.
There may be other characteristics, but my point here is that I am not good at listing things.
There are other Wordisms that have Whitakerisms. Wordism is concept that took our a lot of work and came out so simply that an intelligent, rebellious mind cannot believe he didn’t have it all the time.
Wordism is the fatal error everyone falls into when they talk about Universal Love or Loyalty to Humankind in General. It is more divisive and evil than any fanatical nationalism or racism, because its idea of “Humanity” is forcing all humans into one mold and destroying any mind that isn’t loyal to that particular mold, that set of Words.
Militant obedience cuts the ground out from under such intellectual terms as The Stockholm Syndrome, and ties together the toadies of the grammar school bully with the mobs on campus who stage a riot if anybody tries to make a speech disagreeing with Mommy Professor.
Whitakerisms constitute the exact opposite of a Wordist Whitakerism.
Whitakerisms cut the ground out from under the Buckleys and the Mommy Professors who believe that they have an explanation of human behavior that only exists up there in the ethereal realm of their big words and somehow Special Discussion.
Whitakerisms should encourage you, and me, to grow out of our John Birch or totally Southern backgrounds and study what truth the side we took really represents. Every Southerner should recognize the Siding With the Bully Syndrome in terms like “The Lessons of the Civil War.”
It is human nature that both sides in any conflict are partly right and partly wrong. All Mommy Professor ever does is get “lessons” out of the winning side.
For which the winning side pays him.
I would appreciate BUGSERS to toss in other Whitakerisms developed over our many years.
Political Correctness, The Stockholm Syndrome, the Weakest Generation, the Party Line, THESE ARE DIFFERENT NAMES FOR THE SAME THING!
There is nothing complicated, or different, about any of these names for the same thing.
If we THINK about it and get under all the labels and big words, it comes down to something every eight-year-old understands immediately.
It’s called Siding With the Bully
All of us have had experience with bullies from first grade. Stephen King features them in every book, which is one reason for his runaway popularity..
The World War II Generation was beaten into total submission to the bully in Basic Training. The theme of their lives was that they were nothing, and the guy with total power over exhausted teenagers in uniforms, the sergeant, was always right.
The most important parts of history are obvious but missed because of all our synonyms for Siding With Bully, The Stockholm Syndrome, Political Correctness and all the rest.
Liberals and respectable conservatives get paid to debate whether Hitler was special or just like Stalin.
This has nothing to do it.
The point is that Hitler LOST. Stalin simply cannot be lumped in with Hitler because he was one of the Victors.
Once again, while people get paid to debate some abstract point about history, the basis of history is simply siding with the winner. But siding with the winner and siding with the bully are really not different at all.
So those within the System spend a great deal of time showing they are professionals, and not justifying the winning side. They get PAID for this.
But WE are the fools. WE miss the essential point we always quote to show our own wisdom:
“God is on the side of the big battalions.”
All Southerners are used to this from the Civil War. Every kid is used to this from the host of worshippers the mean kid has on the playground.
You see Militant Obedience when you are out there using the Mantra, but it is critical for you to see it for what it is. Our opponents simply quote the bullies.
They honestly believe the bullies are right because the bullies rule the playgrounds.
Think this over and SAY it.
None of us claims that the Mantra is a SOLUTION to the crisis everyone sees right now.
The Mantra says that the system itself is the problem.
We refuse to discuss what is to be done about the white genocide that is part and parcel of the present system until we are allowed to openly discuss the problem itself.
BUGS is devoted to talking about the fatal weakness of the System today.
The System we all know has failed.
The System we all know is headed for disaster.
People say that Obama can be defeated if Republicans get their act together.
What they can’t say is that there is no act.
Republicans have failed. Democrats just fail worse.
There comes a time when one must start with the realization that all the normal, “practical” stuff has, in plain English, FAILED.
The whole thing has failed and everybody knows it.
What we do in BUGS is to discuss the system itself, not comparing one “side,” as the media call it, to another “side” of the same system.
We all know that America and Europe are becoming third world countries as we have a third world population.
There are a hundred perfectly valid reasons why no one in the present system would dare say that.
And the sentence above defines the system which is failing.
It is simple logic that when the system is failing the only solution is to go straight at the whole basis of the system.
In other words, to say what no one dares to say.
When everyone knows the system itself is failing, NOTHING IS WORTH SAYING THAT IS NOT HERESY.
The Mantra is a great beginning.
We all know that Bob’s greatest failing is his indirectness, subtlety, and just plain being shy.
So when you don’t fully exploit a point I am likely to smile weakly and simper some indirect criticism.
SO LISTEN, YOU BASTARDS!
When someone asks what a “white” country is, you tell them it is one of the countries they insist has an obligation to import huge numbers of third world immigrants.
THEY define it all the time.
General Wesley Clark defined what he would send American soldiers to die for: “There is no place IN EUROPE for an ethnically pure country.”
There is no place on earth for a Canada that is not multicultural, meaning multiracial.
Don’t get tied up defining something for them that THEY have defined.
I am very proud of the fact that our seminar members level with me.
Writing the piece called “Ends and Means” below I got right off of my original point.
So Genseric’s comment was:
“I am not afraid to say that this one went right over my head and slammed directly into the wall behind me.”
Genseric is right. I wonder what I was smoking when I let myself wander off like that.
Try to get in mind that I was once a Mommy Professor myself, and one is never fully cured.
The point of the article was supposed to be this: Anti-whites always are careful never to mix up a democratic socialist with a Communist, because a socialist may have the same GOALS as a Communist, but the MEANS he advocates make all the difference.
By contrast, anyone whose GOAL is to save the white race is routinely called a Nazi, even though our MEANS are exactly as different from Hitler’s as the British Labor Party’s were from Stalin’s.
To call someone a Communist, you must demonstrate that he advocates, or would happily countenance, the violent overthrow of the government. Further, you must demonstrate that he is in favor of a dictatorship, a “dictatorship of the proletariat” which we saw with Stalin and Lenin.
Hitler’s Brown Shirts used violence. Hitler advocated dictatorships.
I don’t. I’ve seen them and I don’t like them.
The article may have wandered off course because it occurred to me that this is not such an important difference as it was when I was coming up. Back then the Greatest Generation has just fought A War For Freedom and thereby succeeded in turning one third of the human race over to the Communists.
Back then, even honest leftists were afraid of how much farther Communism was going to go. So to a lot of people, the difference between a democratic leftist and a Communist was very, very important. So every college freshman got a set of lectures on the difference between a democratic socialist and a Communist, and you were considered unsophisticated if you confused the two.
But segregationists were unhesitatingly compared to Hitlerites.
The lesson is a bit out of date, but it is worth noting.
All socialists are not Communists, and everybody knows it. All racists are not Nazis, and that is a fact that is still worth taking note of.
I wrote an article about how SILLY Marx is. People are STILL talking about his Scientific History as their version of the Gospels. But we are talking about history from the mid-nineteenth century. As I wrote, to find a synonym, I said “early Victorian history.”
To me that synonym was a great discovery. I was trying to make it clear how ridiculous it was for someone today to be talking about Scientific History from an age when history was entirely different.
But with all my tens of thousands of hours of debate, what hit me was that phrase “Early Victorian” I had happened upon. When you are trying to make the point that Marxist history is not incorrect, it is SILLY, people don’t realize how much more effective I would have been if, instead of referring to it as mid-nineteenth century history, I would have said, “This nonsense is based on Early Victorian history.”
Maybe you have to have been in a lot of arguments to see the total difference here. To refer to something as “mid-nineteenth century” doesn’t have anything LIKE the walloping power that calling it “Victorian” does.
National Review tries to be acceptable to self-styled Intellectuals. But we will not be successful until we make them ASHAMED of babbling crap that a ten-year old wouldn’t fall for.
These people are proud of being traitors. They are not affected by whether what they say is right or not.
But they can be SHAMED.
God knows there is more than enough room on our tiny pro-white side for men like Jared Taylor who can face-to-face with the self-styled Intellectuals and street-fighters like me whom they truly hate for making them look stupid.
From what Dr. Duke says, I am sure Jared Taylor often wishes he COULD sink down to my level and hit those self-righteous, conscienceless bastards in the gut the way I can.
It reminds me of my days on Committee staff when I would be questioning someone from the education establishment giving me theories and I wanted so badly to say, “Listen, you stupid son of a bitch, while you’re pumping out these dumbass theories, your students are ILLITERATE.“ But I was there speaking for my congressman, so I had to hold that stuff in.
So what I notice as a great discovery is almost impossible for me to explain to someone who hasn’t been in the middle of the melee, like the folks in Comments 7 are.
You have to have “been there and done that” to recognize the critical difference between having a club like “Early Victorian” on hand instead of a pillow like “Mid-nineteenth century.”
One commenter said they were afraid that their particular suggestion “might be overstepping the bounds.”
But the point is that BUGS has no room for people who go to pieces because you DO overstep the bounds. This gives you a chance to simply say what you are thinking.
There are two reasons people fear to make suggestions that might be taken badly.
One is the human time bomb. Stormfront’s Religious section was famous for that. People were regularly cut off for saying the wrong thing or endless pages were devoted to why someone should be cut off.
So we simply have no room in BUGS for touchy people.
But this has another side to it. Our own commenters have a tough skin, too. My black little heart is gladdened when a person who uses the term “anti” is viciously and unapologetically denounced.
A person who spots one of us — including Lord Robert Hisself — saying something stupid and destructive should SAY so.
There is time to be diplomatic but there is also a time to let ‘em HAVE it.
This is all more effective if you carefully reserve the totally unkind remarks for when somebody really needs to be called down, as when they use “anti.” Extreme remarks are for extreme situations.
On the other hand, someone who needs constant kindness and diplomacy doesn’t belong in BUGS. This is a rough place.
Wars DO tend to get a bit rough.
This also gives me a lot of freedom. I keep telling you that a lot of my ideas are developed right here. You allow me to talk things out here, to think out loud in front of an intelligent and critical audience.
We are exploring a whole world of logic and observations here that no one is allowed to even THINK about elsewhere. When one is thinking in areas no one is allowed to delve into, you are inevitably going to say some totally stupid things.
Many, many of the things I have said here over the years contain embarrassing nonsense and factual nonsense.
Some of the corrections have been as disrespectful as they deserved.
I am a battle scarred old hard politics vet. That doesn’t bother me.
I only feel let down when someone does NOT tell me when they believe I am just plain WRONG.
It’s simple, but it’s always true: You only arrive at the truth by stating your proposition and having others do you the service of shooting it down.
Old Bob is NOT a human time bomb.