Tyranny rests upon the principle that any plausible lie will do. That is the source of doctrines: plausible lies. And it is discouraging that people are so easily tricked by plausible lies.

The vicious Morlocks, who are the apex predators of any particular Establishment, put incredible energy into the development of “national” doctrines, usually in connection with denying people their ethnic and racial rights as separate peoples. Also, because the Eloi, the Morlock’s prey, have the greatest respect for the terms “legal” and “illegal”, they know how easily the Eloi are tricked by doctrines that are “officially” sanctioned. In contrast, the Morlocks themselves are never so idiotic.

This is why I love listening to Henry Kissinger. Henry Kissinger is a Morlock who can’t keep his mouth shut. Accordingly, he gives away the thinking of all Morlocks. Kissinger’s basic shtick is doctrinal: Competing regimes must have a shared framework and vocabulary for perceiving their conflicts or these conflicts are prone to uncontrolled escalation. In other words, they must agree on doctrine.

All the Morlocks have to do to anyone challenging the geographic naming conventions and fake sanctioned histories behind their doctrines is brand them with “illegal” motives. In other words, internal psychological compliance with their doctrines is mandatory and enforced (i.e., you are an “American” first, and a white person second). People like Kissinger want to make this a global regime. This is what gives tyranny its religious character. It is the demand for internal psychological compliance across peoples and borders. And this is the basic principle international tyranny uses to con people into accepting fake “national” histories, motivated by the need to justify the subjugation of peoples and their territories under regimes that have procured international recognition for their doctrines.

That’s why the most important question of any sanctioned history is: whose history? Asking that question is to seriously get in the face of officially sanctioned doctrines.

For example, I resent having a piece of the history of the African Diaspora named, “American History”. It’s African history in the Americas, but it is NOT “American History”. There is not one part of the history of black people that is my people’s history. It is so important not to get the history of your own people confused with other people’s history. That confusion is EXACTLY what the tyrants want. The American Constitution is now so muddied by this nonsense, by its doctrine of racial and ethnic inclusiveness, sweeping many separate ethnic, racial, and national histories into one big confused muddle, that it is worthless. It is really no different structurally than the method used in the Peoples Republic of China. The edifices and practices look a lot different, but the underlying structure is the same. It is all about mashing different races and peoples together, and calling them the same people (“one nation”) with a “shared” history. The con of “one nation” and “shared history” is one of the fundamental doctrines of tyranny.

Watch out: The Morlocks are calling the history of Mexico, “American History”. One the few remaining Manchu’s in Manchuria would have no problem understanding this phenomena at all. Everybody calls him “Chinese” and he is required to accept the history of Ming China as part of his own “shared” history. The Han conquered him with his own Mandarin language and then used that as a tool to drag him into Han “centeredness”. It all happened fairly rapidly and on the scale of real time, fairly recently. That’s why it is such a damn threat to have English speaking Mexicans in America. If you don’t understand this, there is something wrong with you.

Similarly, I have no problem whatsoever with the fact that the President of the United States is black. It is the fact that he is black AND communicates in English as his primary language that is the problem. What is Barack Obama’s real identification? It is not with the non-white world as a whole. It is only with that portion of the non-white world that communicates primarily in English and to a lesser extent that portion of the nonwhite world that is merely fluent in English. THAT CONSTITUTES THE THREAT because it is that portion of the nonwhite world that is demanding political rights at the expense of our own. I feel like Robert Whitaker. Why doesn’t anybody else but me see this?

It is subtle how perspective gets twisted by dominant languages and hidden motives. That’s how the tyrants catch you. It is their use of dominant languages as a political tool to impose foreign culture and histories, the names they put on land and water, what they include and exclude in legal documents, and what they thereby justify. It is how they confuse separate people’s histories and throw them all together. And then people succumb to these implied perspectives without ever questioning, without ever asking, why?

You have to get your mind right BEFORE you decide what door you are going to open. Your whole self-conception and your conception of your own people can get incredibly screwed up if you don’t understand that there are compelling motives behind how a dominant language is used as a political tool, how geographies are named, how separate people’s histories are jumbled together, and how entire histories are named.

Organizations always ask you for money or your vote.

I ask for YOU.

You will find the people who are paying their dues to BUGS over in General Comments 7.

Frankly what I am asking from you is not nearly as easy as money. It is getting in there, directly in the enemy’s face, wherever he is, in personal conversation, hitting blogs in the period before they ban us, and having the patience to do a thoroughly consistent job of it.

Some in GC-7 get a kick out of this. Most combat mercenaries actually enjoy combat. Combat mercs are the same people who love fast cars, but only if they are taking hideous risks while doing it.

Most of us do not like getting shot at or being in a car accident. But thanks God for those who are on our side and who DO get a kick out of it.

A commenter in GC-7 gave us a link to one of his fights on the Internet. He showed solid discipline. He answered each of the standard attacks, all of which we have heard a thousand times, with a short and devastating Mantra reply, and ended every single time with :

“Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.”

Damn, he’s GOOD!

It is hard work for person with a frontal lobe. An anti-white can write a sentence or a book, but everything he says comes down to a few endlessly repeated statements. After reading BUGS you an knock them on their asses.

But you have to keep at it.

They do no thinking, it is a like arguing with robots. As I said, this is a cruel thing to ask of an animal with a large frontal lobe. You have to resort to the behavior of a particularly intelligent insect.

But an insect is built for it. An insect is used to it.

Yes, it would be a lot easier not to throw our racial survival into a conversation.

But if YOU don’t, NOBODY will.

A check won’t do it.

Your vote won’t do it.

It’s you or nobody.

Uncle Bob wants YOU!

Like, the truth of this becomes clear almost as soon as you state it.

If a state’s existence is based on a proposition, it cannot allow the proposition to be seriously questioned.

In a propositional state, all loyalty is based on the absolute conviction that one is loyal to an Only True Faith. History shows us that the one thing that will change where there is free speech is the Only True Faith of a time before.

You can look at “When the Wagons Rolled West” (link) to see what America was based on before the very questionable adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment.

America was seen as part of the movement of the white race, which had moved, in wave after wave, into Europe by succeeding groups of Indo-Europeans, Celts, Germans, Scandinavians, Doric, Ionic, Latin. America was part of that age old tradition.

Even after the Thirteenth Amendment was adopted, the Dred Scot Decision, “A black man has no rights that a white man need respect,” was still official. Until July 20, 1868, when the Radical Republicans declared the amendment imposed by their military dictatorship to have been ratified, the Dred Scot Decision was the Law of the Land.

This is so buried that it is said that the only amendment adopted to reverse a decision of the Supreme Court was the one allowing a national income tax. Every historian states that. Every historian MUST say that.

Why?

Because, as in all authoritarian states, history must conform to the doctrine, the proposition.

In the Soviet Union if the economic statistics did not confirm to the doctrine that they were thriving and growing, an economist who deferred from that line lost not just his job but his life.

Any historian who questions the proposition that for the first ninety years of its existence America was dedicated to the proposition that all men were created equal is out on his ass.

A state based on natural loyalties does not have to enforce any particular proposition.

And the proposition can be Freedom.

Another Whitakerism: a capital letter word is always the exact opposite of the same word in the lower case.

The Inquisition practiced Mercy, because slowly burning a heretic alive gave him his only chance to repent and be spared Eternal Hellfire. Torture is part and parcel of True Mercy.

When one says that America is dedicated to Freedom, it means that if anyone questions True Equality they are an enemy of True Freedom.

The result is that anyone who recites actual history is a traitor to the Propositional State.

The lower case freedom cannot allow a doctrine of any kind to be the basis of the state.

The Constitution dedicates America to “ Secure the blessings of Liberty to ourselves and OUR Posterity.”

By DEFINITION, the blessing of freedom means that you do NOT state the doctrine that is best for yourselves and your posterity.

There is nothing as provincial as a universal institution.

There are only so many nations, but there are surely well over a million Universal Truths. Every tiny church on the Bible Belt may declare that its version of the Bible as THE Universal Truth. Marxism is divided into hundreds of sects, each of which honestly believes it is the Only Really True Faith.

A thousand new Universal Truths are declare weekly.

For every Universal Truth any loyalty that is not to the True Word it preaches to be  is “tribalism.”

It takes at least two people to make a tribe. It only takes one to invent a new Universal Truth, and a lot of people invent more than one, and believe that each one is as Universal as they think of it until they decide on another.

Once one THINKS about this, it becomes so obvious, like the Mantra, that it is hard to imagine that anyone could honestly feel that he has the Only Universal Truth.

Yet every white person who demands the end of our race honestly believes we are tribalists, whereas he is devoted to The Only Universal Truth.

If you are ever in a war, be sure not to let someone who believes he is not any kind of tribalist get behind you, because there is another problem with Universalism. I’ve seen it in action many, many times.

The same person who really believes he represents the True Bible and fights for some Biblical quotes can and probably will find another quote that will tell him he must shoot you in the back.

Anyone whose only loyalty is to one set of words can get out in the field to fight for them and one night have another Conversion.

People think the problem is insincerity. Actually, I have seen as many people suddenly sell their side out with perfect sincerity. A loyalty to a race or a country has limits and stability. A person whose entire world is a set of words can and probably will change his words, his beliefs a number of times.

Do not forget to wonder about someone who declares he has no use for his race because of what he IS loyal to. Otherwise you give the other side a free ride while you deny your “racism” or your “nationalism” or your “tribalism.”

“The point is not whether the dog plays chess well, but that the dog can play chess at all.”

So when a tenured professor at Emory had to resign because he had made up his facts to prove that early Americans had very few guns it was no scandal.

What is more important, every single respectable conservative commentator insisted that this one example was unique. Every single respectable conservative insisted that all the OTHER Politically Correct professors were scrupulously honest.

Meanwhile, back on Planet Earth, Politically Correct fraud is so well protected that it is amazing that we ever catch anybody at it. The head of the professors’ association is an open Marxist, and he states openly that truth is a POLITICAL matter.

How, exactly is that different from a Medieval Pope dictating scientific truth because it is a RELIGIOUS matter.

It means the same thing.

EXACTLY the same thing.

Under the popes, religious truth was declared by the pope. Under Marxism, political truth is dictated by the dictatorship of the proletariat.

The head of America’s organization of professors, whose only product is supposed to be truth, paid for by public money, states flatly that truth is whatever he decides SHOULD be true.

It would be amazing if what respectable conservatives all say were true.

When a group of people states flatly that truth is whatever their politics say, it is not amazing that a few professors get caught on global warming or guns, but that any professor ever gets caught at all.

Respectable conservatives earn their pay. But they can only earn their pay until people stop just disagreeing with them and start laughing at them.

They earn their pay by claiming an objectivity for professors that professors do not claim for themselves.

Conservatives insist that professors are objective.

Politically Correct professors claim no such thing.

Anyone who knows anything about Marxism recognizes the term “politically correct.” It is and always has been an entirely Marxist term.

The conservative Bubbah says, “Gorsh, I didn’t know that! You must thin I is ignernt.”

And for once, the conservative Bubbah is right.