The best short comment I ever got on my writing was “Bob writes interesting stuff when he isn’t writing about himself.” I got a kick out of it because it was so blunt, the exact thing a diplomat doesn’t EVER say to a self-obsessed old man.
It has been remarked that writers have to be crazy, because they spend their entire working lives sitting there talking to themselves. The fact that one is sitting there talking to himself is obscured by the fact that one is doing it on a machine by hand instead of babbling to oneself on a street corner.
But some have done it on a voice recorder. They really are talking to themselves, just like that guy you heard about who ended up in the dingaling ward.
When you DO get something published, you often have a bit of a feeling that you are making something private public. Even Stephen King, who couldn’t be MORE public, has an intensely personal feeling about a book he has been up close and personal with for MONTHS, just him and that fetus literally growing into a book for the millions.
All writers get frustrated when they ask people to read over what they are doing. He gives you his project which he has been slowly developing and rewriting, and you point out some spelling errors and grammar. He is waiting for the first verdict of you, his first jury, and what he gets is some school work.
The immediately result is that said writer gets a desperate wish to have kidneys for breakfast.
Yours.
But I have slowly come to realize that it is the writer, not the first reader, who is being naïve.
You are trying to find out whether your draft writing is fulfilling your own ambitions for it. Is it entertaining — for your AUDIENCE? Is it understandable? For your AUDIENCE? You are a writer precisely because you know this audience and you have worked your butt off to be able to be THEIR writer.
Then you hand a draft of your special idea to your special people, to someone and expect THEM to look it over and tell you how it plays to a particular group of people of whom he has no knowledge and, likely, damned little interest. And you have an urge to rip out his guts when he is more impressed by your using ‘their instead’ of ‘their,’ than he is about subjects and people you have spent most of your waking life thinking about.
When I went to a party, it seemed that most people I met wanted to WRITE. Over half the time what they wanted to write was an autobiography.
They are most interested in themselves.
Aren’t we all? That is why I put the word AUDIENCE in caps up there.
So there is a personal element to my getting upset when comments drift away completely from the point I am trying to make. I bitch and I moan, but the simple fact is that Hitler IS more interesting than Bob Whitaker.
That is where DISCIPLINE comes in, both for you and for me.
#1 by Jason Here on 05/03/2012 - 7:32 am
Bob may end up being more important than Hitler, if Bob stops and reverses White Genocide. Will he be as well known? Who knows, but he will have exercised greater power.
Any advice you can throw out on writing is appreciated. I would love to write a book , but I have a problem. I hate most fiction and read only non-fiction. Yet WRITING fiction is all that appeals to me for some reason.
It would be fun to write a popular novel that could carry our themes between the lines. I don’t think an explicit pro-White book would do well beyond a tiny group, but a mainstream yet subversive book could prepare them for Manta concepts.
What is the most influential type of writing today? Non-ficiton? Fiction? Bloging? Or maybe it’s writing animations. The satire of The Video was very effective.
#2 by phil white on 05/04/2012 - 9:23 am
Don’t count your potential audience out. What’s coming may be on the order of the cultural level of the reformation.
As to Hitler, Machiavelli would have noted four chacter traits that he could not escape. As Nicoolo stated most great leaders just happen to be born at a time when their personality tratis fit the needs of the times.
Hitlers four traits that initially hepled him and his casue were over agressivnes, over confidence, a control freak nature and stuborness.
Theses personality traits served Hitler well up to about 1938 or 39.
What a different world, and better for us had he stopped territorial expansion in 1938.
As another sage put it, “When the student is ready (the masses) the teacher will appear.
The teach will be the one who’s ideas are correct and resonate with the people.
Before the people are ready the leaders needed will never develope a following.
#3 by ANOTHERWHITERABBIT on 05/03/2012 - 9:51 am
you are right Hitler might be more interesting but i cant write to Hitler and have him tell me what im doing wrong and he don’t have words that reflect the here and now so he might be more interesting and for good reasons but he took germany back with torch parades and muscle and now look at germany not exactly an ethnic state for Whites.
#4 by beefcake on 05/03/2012 - 9:55 am
Figured I’d put this in the comment section here, so that it gets READ.
—————–
“What you need to accept, and realize is that when your enemy is asking you “what is wrong with Genocide?”- or any variation of it, you are actually WINNING.
ALWAYS keep in mind you are NOT trying to convince the Anti-White of ANYTHING, and you don’t need to answer his Questions. Generally I like to answer a Question with a Question, except, when the enemy has just exposed himself to the Audience, with a question like the one he just made.
Then I make a statement to the AUDIENCE, who this is ALL about.
You can say: “ONLY a Genocidal Maniac would insist people need to proove to him that Genocide is morally wrong”.
OR
“You’re asking us to explain to you why GENOCIDE is WRONG? That is like advocating murder and demanding people explain to you why MURDER is WRONG.”
Then LEAVE the conversation.
The Audience does not need you to point out anything else, now just LET the Anti-White dig the hole they are in deeper.
Once you POINT OUT that the person is demanding you to explain WHY Genocide is wrong, nothing the Anti-White says will EEVER get the Audience back.
You have WON, now leave, and go somewhere else and repeat.
Just like when you call them on Justifying Genocide.
Once they JUSTIFY GENOCIDE, and you point out that is what they are doing to the Audience, your job is done there, POINT MADE, you just WON.
That is such an odd feeling for Pro-Whites who are new to using The Mantra and the way we use it to expose Anti-Whites, the one thing we got to realize, is WHEN we just WON the battle, and its is time to take the battle somewhere else.”
____________________________
Perhaps Bob may want to mention it in his blog, but one BASIC that I notice some of the swarms needs to realize, is what it LOOKS LIKE when they are winning.
Some of our SWARM is getting so good at making a point about the Anti-Whites advocating Genocide, they now need to be reminded how to handle victory in front of the Audience.
#5 by Dave on 05/03/2012 - 10:20 am
BUGS is about learning to exert power for white people.
Self-indulgence is the enemy of power.
For example, when I see cops apprehend a suspect, what I invariably see is a bunch of self-indulgent buffoons bellowing and waving guns. Cops love to bellow and wave guns. That tells you what low level buffoons they are. Their opponents are other buffoons. Criminals are nearly always amateurs, have been since time immemorial. The cop/criminal pairing is a buffoon/buffoon pairing. It is a paring of self-indulgent infants with self-indulgent infants.
Professional criminals are not criminals. Professionals never permit that label to come their way.
The very essence of intelligence is the ability to detect STRUCTURE. When I see a bellowing gun waving cop, he has told be everything I need to know about the STRUCTURE of “cop”. I am one of his invisible masters. He cannot even see me. I can make him do anything I want him to do. He is the dog of an invisible master.
A dog is a four legged stimulus and response entity. There is no real consciousness there. You have to stand erect to have consciousness. The “apparent” consciousness of a dog is a simulation of a stimulus and response entity. I think it is hilarious how most white people do not recognize this. They think four legged creatures are conscious, just like the buffoon amateur criminal thinks cops are conscious.
Self-indulgence is the enemy of power. Intelligence is the ability to detect structure. The Mantra is several phrases that reveal the structure of our oppression. It is all about structure. It is all about leaving the realm of self-indulgence.
#6 by Gavin on 05/03/2012 - 11:18 am
Dave you seem to have contradictory views on cops. You have stated “the anti-white Establishment ends with white cops.” -http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/2012/04/06/how-to-be-a-sellout/
Which does not fit with your description of them above.
I have seen cops enforce anti-White dictates and be such sycophantic dorks to the anti-White establishment when some vandalism was done to a house where a BM/WF lived. Which makes me understand what you are writing about them today. Your comment that “the anti-White establishment ends with White cops” doesn’t ring true to me.
#7 by dungeoneer on 05/03/2012 - 10:44 am
One day hopefully I will have mastered the ability to find the sweet spot somewhere between blanking out and engaging in mental diarrhea.
#8 by Gavin on 05/03/2012 - 10:58 am
Discipline is what pros must cultivate.
I don’t treat BUGS as a watercooler chat or a source of entertainment. It is a training ground.
#9 by Harumphty Dumpty on 05/03/2012 - 12:03 pm
Gavin, I’m glad you’re that way, because I think I’ve learned my most important lessons from you. And if feeling delight when one reads something is also entertainment, I’m afraid you’ve definitely entertained me, a lot!
But now to be unlike you: Bob wrote,
“the simple fact is that Hitler IS more interesting than Bob Whitaker.”
LMAO! That line totally caught me by surprise!
And I shake my head in wonder at all the people who want to write a book. Don’t they have any sense of their limitations? Apparently not.
“Bob writes interesting stuff when he isn’t writing about himself.”
I disagree with this, for anyone. I like to hear personal stories. Maybe it’s because I was a child and adolescent in the 40s and 50s, a time when the people I knew seemed to tell you NOTHING about themselves.
I’m a hopeless product of the 60s, the “let-it-all-hang-out” crowd. Very un-White. I’m trying (slightly) to learn how to be White again. It’s hard.
#10 by shari on 05/03/2012 - 1:06 pm
I tend to think that we will have to cope with “blanking out” or “mental diarrhea” until we get some fresh morning air and a glipse of daylite. I’m just amazed at how well many of you do in spite of everything.
#11 by Dave on 05/03/2012 - 1:38 pm
Gavin,
To most middle class whites, race conflict is theoretical. They do not actually deal with it on the street. Not so the cops. Police departments are racial conflict zones as are jails and prisons. The middle class ignores this.
I want to condemn cops as an institution. I don’t respect their training and tactics. But there are many very intelligent cops and secret clubs of white police officers that are on our side.
#12 by Epiphany on 05/03/2012 - 4:32 pm
It is not so much that working class Whites are prejudiced against Blacks, but rather that middle class Whites are prejudiced in FAVOR of Blacks. The poorer Whites see Blacks for what they really are!
#13 by BGLass on 05/03/2012 - 9:42 pm
To most middle class whites, race conflict is theoretical. They do not actually deal with it on the street….”
Idk, Dave. They do. Definitely more than 20 years ago. Everyone’s lives have been touched, somehow. And to whatever extent they have isolated themselves, don’t they have t.v.’s?
That’s what makes the whole question of their consciousness interesting. Of course they have t.v.s and contemporary communications systems. So what mental snafu (arrogance?) makes them think that a) whatever they are seeing will not happen to them, could not happen to them, is not involving them? b) are they so deluded in magical thinking that they believe “fates” (gods?) will not allow them to be attacked, because they are the “good white people” versus the “evilnaziswhowanttokillsixmillionjews” and other redneck sorts.
So it is not theoretical. An old Bob Dylan line from ‘Look out ma, I’m only bleeding”: “meantime life outside goes on all around you.” It’s all happening all around them, all the time.
Life is going on while they are steeped in Wordism.
They “homeschool,” so therefore they are good. Like a lady at a county fair kept pushing her product, saying it’s “organic,” which is code for “good.” When we pointed out that many organic substances are toxic, she was confused. Like bragging, “we have our water source, our own well!, so we are not dependents on governments!” But of course, well water can be toxic. Just because it’s organic doesn’t make it good, lol.
That’s Wordism. Their character flaws alone —their immorality— does not allow them to understand they are part of the world, part of what is happening, implicating in what is happening, etc… They are Wordist.
You can call it brainwashing, but arrogance is immoral. They so want to be (or just to appear to be) moral— so, ok… how moral are they really? Is it moral not to notice anything around you? Is it moral to believe you are above things that happen to others? If fear runs beneath the desire to adhere to the right thing, the right word, how moral is fear? Isn’t fear just a self-centered lack of faith?
#14 by Jason Here on 05/03/2012 - 10:45 pm
No matter what platitudes middle class Whites SAY about blacks, they certainly ACT like they want be as far away from them as possible, paying a steep price to be in separate neighborhoods. Action speak louder.
#15 by Epiphany on 05/04/2012 - 4:00 am
The whole thing is sickening. Feminists, supposedly so concerned about the plight of women, ignore the various examples of Blacks mistreating women.
#16 by Genseric on 05/04/2012 - 6:21 am
“…the simple fact is that Hitler IS more interesting than Bob Whitaker.” – Bob
Maybe for now. But then again, Hitler was small potatoes when compared to the Kaiser at the time.
“There is a man alone, without family, without children, without God….He builds legions but he doesn’t build a nation. A nation is created by families, a religion, tradition: it is made up out of the hearts of mothers, the wisdom of fathers, the joy and the exuberance of children. [Of Germany under Hitler he says]….an all-swallowing State, disdainful of human dignities and the ancient structure of our race, sets itself up in place of everything else. And the man who, alone, incorporates in himself this whole State, has neither a God to honour nor a dynasty to conserve, nor a past to consult….
For a few months I was inclined to believe in National Socialism. I thought of it as a necessary fever. And I was gratified to see that there were, associated with it for a time, some of the wisest and most outstanding Germans. But these, one by one, he has got rid of or even killed….He has left nothing but a bunch of shirted gangsters….
This man could bring home victories to our people each year without bringing them…glory….But of our Germany, which was a nation of poets and musicians and artists and soldiers, he has made a nation of hysterics and hermits, engulfed in a mob and led by a thousand liars or fanatics….” – Kaiser Willhelm II
You’d make a far better Kaiser than you would a Fuhrer, coach.