Search? Click Here
Join the BUGS Team! Post on the internet along with us to fight White Genocide!

The More Important It is to Say, the Less Likely It is True

Posted by Bob on June 1st, 2012 under Coaching Session


A commenter is trying out asking people “Who told you to say that?” That is VERY good!

But do it with DISCIPLINE.

What I am saying here results from the subtext analysis of that brilliant insight.

This article also discusses an argument that you might want to try out on someone at some point. With discipline. Right now you MUST tell anti-whites who say there is no such thing as white that they pick the countries that must allow immigration and assimilation by that exact criterion.

But now that some of you are at the journeyman stage, you know when there’s a break you can experiment in.

A bit of subtext on that “Cult” spat: Every apprentice begins in a cult. That is, no matter how natural a talent he is, he has to spend some time having the most basic rules hammered into him. He makes his actions automatic, and THEN he begins to create new ways.

I really do consider myself a Coach, and I really do conduct this seminar that way.

Some things that are absolutely true and absolutely absurd were unspoken until the publication of Parkinson’s Law about 1951. It was a humor article, but it was the ironic humor, the bald truth as told by an Englishman before the Weakest Generation.

There have been a lot of Laws since. Parkinson’s Law opened a way of communicating cynicism that is true by ironic humor and calling it a Law.

Parkinson’s Law stated that “Work increases to fill the time allotted to it.”

To the humorless bureaucrats Alfred Northcote Parkinson was used to, this was a bad joke. But everyone knew that if you assign a whole department to something, they will stay busy with it, as Parkinson said, “No matter what the effect on the product, if there is indeed a product.”

The Law I outline as the title of this piece is recognized by everyone, but stated by no one. When a person being questioned by the police says “I didn’t do it.“ the statement is taken down, but it is weighed against the Need to Say Law that is the title here: he NEEDS to say he didn‘t do it.

So people say “There is no such thing as race“ or “Global Warming exists and can only be cured by bureaucrats taking over the world economy.” People were dumb enough to accept the first as Pure Idealism until the top environmental scientists were caught cooking the figures..

So we learned again that what is said is what a person needs to say. It’s a lot like the Intelligence Need to Know Rule. It could be called the Need to Say Rule. When someone says race does not exist, it might be useful to point out that in public people HAVE to say that.

This brings up the whole spectrum of Hate Laws and personal violence and career ruination.

Anti-whites have no shame. I would be embarrassed to repeat what everyone has heard a thousand times the way they do. Maybe this is a way to peel off a little of that absolute lack of concern about being an obvious damned fool.

Share it now. Like it while you're at it.
  1. #1 by six gun on 06/01/2012 - 10:32 am

    Who told you that? is a sharp knife that needs to be used carefully.
    You need to be very skilful and know your ground.
    It could be used against us as well – hence why the facts of the Mantra and your knowledge of them must be totally rock solid and you must be able to hit them with the facts very hard.

    There are certainly anti-White jingles that can be cut to ribbons.

    There is no such thing as White countries
    There is no such thing as race
    There is no such thing as White people.
    Diversity is strength.
    Multiculturalism is….something, I can’t think of anything positive to say but I’m sure they do.

    These and other “statements” are repeated and repeated until by Lenin’s repeat a lie often enough logic they become true.

    Who told you that? is very nice to rock the anti-White back on his heels.

    It is like “in your opinion”
    I used to do a lot of court work giving expert evidence. I knew my facts and my level of experience is some areas was held by only a very few people in the whole country. I resented that this was still just “in my opinion” and some Johnny come lately could say something in “their opinion” and it might just be held on equal merit. So I know “only in your opinion” is a killer.

    I used this yesterday. This anti-White was attacking White people being proud in their ethnic group, its history and heritage. He was harping on about how this [White] pride was a weapon used to attack other people. I could have attacked that idea in several ways.
    I hit him with “Only in your opinion.” He couldn’t recover.

    I had another thought this morning. It involved the tired retort of “racist.”
    Of course you can come back with “only in your opinion.”
    You can also ask what they mean by racist.
    Some will struggle but those that don’t will likely come out with the “hate” chestnut. If they don’t gentle persuasion will get them there.
    I decided I might reply with – but no-one I know hates the Eskimos in Greenland and no-one I know hates the Africans in the Congo or the Indians in the Amazon or the Asians in Tibet…..
    This list is however you like.
    So if I don’t hate all these different people, for all these different ethnic groups and races, how can I be racist?

    I have not tried this one yet – maybe it is not new but it is new to me and interesting.

  2. #2 by cecilhenry on 06/01/2012 - 11:47 am

    I often try to ask:

    Does race have value? Is it racist for races to exist?
    Is it wrong for racial groups to exist?
    (They think to themselves….Well, No…but..)

    If races have value, then they have interests and rights they must protect–yes???

    Then it would be immoral and irresponsible not to protect those interests….yes???

    Then the rest of the Mantra follows.

    (the anti-whites rarely consider whites to be the race of value. They have in mind africans or anyone non-white.. Indeed whites tend to be a kind of raceless default choice. We’re the model–hence raceless)

    Well, actually who they have in mind is anyone they don’t ENVY, who can be used to attack and bring down those they DO ENVY.

    Its a status game for power and control–within the racial groups and between them. Anti-whites use other people and exploit their interests with the hammer of race.

    And I think envy is a key dynamic here. ENVY.

    It is a shameful thing to be exposed for having, and embarrassing to admit to.

    How to use that fact I’m still not clear on. But I think liberals, anti-racists, people who preach equality are primarily ENVIOUS. And will bring down the world and those they envy in that goal.

    BUT for shame the ENVY must never be revealed or pointed out, for it admits what it most wants to DENY. That there are gradations of value, that some things are superior to others, that discrimination is necessary to pursue and protect the good, that there is morality in distinctions, and that they themselves (as with anyone) may NOT measure up to that.

    I think this was important in communism, and in the pervasive ‘equality’ and ‘social justice’ rhetoric.

    It is why victimhood has become a coveted position rather than something to avoid. Victims have the power–and legitimacy in the public’s mind– to exact revenge and engage in aggressive behavior against those they hate–or perhaps envy. Hence we have a whole victim industry today.

    The devil himself is ENVIOUS and wanted to bring down heaven to hide that fact. Somehow this fact must be brought out and used.

    Destroy Western civilization, white countries and white ethnic groups around the world so that no one should feel envy towards them?—

    Hell yes, the anti-racists even think its a NOBLE ideal!!! (The races MUST be made equal you know!!)

  3. #3 by Winged_Hussar83 on 06/01/2012 - 12:07 pm

    I really like your point cecilhenry about anti-whites being primarily motivated by envy.

    Yesterday I was called racist by a fat, tattoo-covered single-mother in her 30s who did not like that I brought up racial issues in an academic discussion.

    These kind of people are everywhere. They cover themselves with filthy-looking tattoos, wear baggy, ill-fitting clothing and claim moral superiority with this stupid word “racist”.

    It’s like they want to tear down anything normal, traditional, and decent and declare themselves the supreme arbiters of morality.

    When I was called this, I said something like “In your opinion I’m a racist, you’re just saying that cause I’m white, anti-racism is just a code-word for anti-white”.

    I then started to talk about Japan but most people don’t have the patience or intellect to comprehend that Japan is not being flooded with millions of racial foreigners because they bombed Nanking or have the world’s 2nd most powerful economy or were allied with Nazis.

    I agree with six gun in that we should just repeat…

    “In your opinion, in your opinion…”

    or

    “what do you mean by racist? Are Japanese people proud of being Japanese racists? Are Arab people who say “no” to Israeli colonization racists? Why are only white people racists? Your little girl is white, is she a racist?”

    How can so many of our own people be so insanely stupid to pursue an ideology that will make their children a tiny minority in their own country?

    Also, I have a question about using the mantra in a university or academic setting. I have used it quite a bit however, I find that it takes the discussion off topic and putting too much of it out there at once can make one seem “defensive”. We should come up with a list of ways to interject the mantra into day-to-day conversation.

  4. #4 by cecilhenry on 06/01/2012 - 12:28 pm

    “How can so many of our own people be so insanely stupid to pursue an ideology that will make their children a tiny minority in their own country?”

    I feel a big part of the psychology in people’s minds that makes this WORK and causes people to adopt this line–even to their own demise– is the aspest of envy.

    We now, especially with the guiderails of Christianity thrown off, a society of envy. People compete for status, money, attention, moral one up man ship, watch each other on facebook, youtube–you name it. Since everything can be so easily seen, it is readily coveted.

    Here’s where the immorality of people’s behavior becomes apparent: they are prepared to ignore and throw away their racial interests and cultural legacy to gain status. It is an example of the ‘Tragedy of the Commons’ on a cultural level: every time some damages their racial interests they gain more in status then they visible lose in their racial and cultural integrity overall. Hence early on the destructive effect is buffered by others.

    IT is a classic example of ‘cutting off ones nose to spite one’s face’. They were fooled into doing this (those who did the fooling must be held accountable), but the selfishness and envy they gave in to perpetuates it.

    What used to and will again assuage such divisive forces of envy and strife in society? A common and unified racial and cultural background with a shared religious ethnic that put community ties and relationship to God first (of only as a incompletely achieved ideal) rather than ‘diversity’ and equality.

    Without that we have increasingly Robert Putnam’s ‘Bowling Alone’ scenario.

    This is why Jews and others who want to break up the rest pursue diversity and attack the moral authority of the religious and cultural norms of society.

    BUT how to USE the fact that ENVY drives this dynamic is different from knowing its there. That is the difference between being opposed to anti-whites and using the Mantra effectively.

  5. #5 by Harumphty Dumpty on 06/01/2012 - 1:04 pm

    Bob: would you please instruct Genseric not to post that I’m a “turd,” or other such insulting language. (Yesterday’s blog). If I’ve failed to notice as I’ve grown older that such language is now acceptable, someone please inform me.

    • #6 by dungeoneer on 06/01/2012 - 2:01 pm

      HD,You`ve been making the Moron Minimum seem like a mountain for ages.

      I sympathize with Genseric`s frustration.

      • #7 by Harumphty Dumpty on 06/02/2012 - 2:04 am

        Would you please just explain in ordinary words what your and Genseric’s “frustration” with me is. I have absolutely no idea, and after reading 8 posts on this site about “Moron Minimum” I have no idea what that means either.

        Seriously. I may sound cranky, but I do want to know what the problem with me is that you have and Genseric has, since I don’t understand it AT ALL. As best I can understand it, Genseric thinks I’m trying to derail the site, but he’s nuts, and I haven’t seen any signs yet that you are.

          • #9 by Harumphty Dumpty on 06/02/2012 - 3:17 am

            Thanks OB, but that’s one of the ones I read and don’t understand.

            • #10 by OldBlighty on 06/02/2012 - 4:23 am

              asdasdasdsadasdad to beat the captcha

              I read your thread and here are my comments:

              “with all due respect, this is bullshit.
              We are pro-white, all others are anti-white.
              Enough, already. – Bob

              What part of Bob’s comment didn’t you understand HD?

              There is pro white and anti-white.

              You are either for whites, or you are against whites.

              Anyone that is for whites = pro white.

              Anyone that is against whites = anti-white

              White pro white, white that is for whites.

              White anti-white, white that is against whites.

              2 + 2 = 4

              I would expect this nonsense from Conglio and as usual, he is the instigator.

              • #11 by OldBlighty on 06/02/2012 - 5:12 am

                BUGS is a message organization, not a membership organization.

                What message are you sending with this ‘white movement’?

                Nothing at all.

  6. #12 by Simmons on 06/01/2012 - 3:15 pm

    There is nothing to these bots, I myself think that maybe a handful of anti-whites could even give any of our advanced BUGsters something like a run for their money.

    Anyway when I go to a thread that a BUGster has Mantraed I will make it personal to an anti-white, but not threatening. I will ask, “why are you an anti-white and why do you advocate for the genocide of whites, thanks.”

    “Personal but not threatening”, remember in human history the virus has killed more than the sword swinging berserker by far

  7. #13 by BGLass on 06/02/2012 - 9:35 am

    Underneath Envy seems self-abnegation.

    What COULD an anti-white be BUT envious? If you pronounce you are “nothing from nowhere” (a “white multiculturalist” which MEANS you collect other peoples’ cultures, what used to be called “Culture Vultures”, and go to “ethnic restaurants” to be chic, and study languages that have nothing to do with your own peoples, etc., etc.) THEN obviously you have substituted Culture Vulturism for your own reality—i.e. the fetish of voyeurism— like a fatso judge huffing about eating popcorn and “watching all the worlds’ peoples” go by…

    But “who are YOU, YOU, YOU?”

    And the answer is nobody from nowhere. Because no time is spent at on who THEY are, where they are from, their own people, etc.

    If you aren’t even a PERSON (in this sense) what else could be felt but envy?

    How else could you feel about all these others in the world, with their languages, cultures, folkways— who get to be like “real people” when your only big role in life is to “take them in.” To “eat.” To CONSUME (as even your own government just calls you a consumer…)

    To be nothing and no one from nowhere— envy would naturally follow from this lack of self.

    So the self-abnegation may come first. Envy is an emptiness that a person feels cannot be filled by what they, themselves, have to work with.

    Once, I talk to someone who had awakened to see a neighbor pacing and pacing in front of their house, true story. The neighbor actually had a nicer place, but that never mattered. Whatever they got, it would never be enough. They just wanted other people’s stuff. Other people were better. If it had belonged to someone else, it was more desirable. They could not think of what they, themselves, really wanted or loved or anything, not really. The person was also from a long line of military (used to listening to others, following orders, valuing discipline in following over thinking for oneself, btw)

    This easy willingness to self-abnegation (including their own thoughts, feelings, based in their real experience) seems a great problem that precedes the envy, imo.

    —Nor is it only of the Tattooed Type. The person above was a Respectable Conservative.

    You see this in the new “anti-feminism.”

    The new “Anti-Feminist” female is often BASED ON THE T.V. LIES about what “feminism” was and why it was needed, (that “male patriarchs took care of the women, and they just cared for children, etc.)

    BACK IN REALITY, women have always had even direct power (just look at the list of Queens, lol—the current english monarch is said by wikipedia to OWN 1/6th of the world’s surface, lol—whatever that could even mean).

    Today’s “anti-feminist” Respectable Conservative Woman DOES little in the home. She knows nothing of the pre-feminist WORK women did— KNOWING about gardening, home remedies, oral traditions, and on and on.

    Today’s “Anti-Feminist” female reactionary wants to be pampered, quite frequently— not to take up the job of generationally passing on white heritage (learning about all the home front things).

    Respectable Conservatives often have the exact same headset (self-abnegating) as the worst “libtard,” and self-abnegation goes hand in hand with envy. “Climby-ness of looking to others to define oneself.”

    —it can be hard to discern those on a learning curve (where one necessarily looks to others for definition) and those who will never stop, who won’t “make it their own,” but are looking for hero worship, to “follow,” to not be a self.

  8. #14 by Genseric on 06/02/2012 - 10:26 am

    The Moron Minimum & The Need To Say Rule

    “The More Important It is to Say, the Less Likely It is True.” – Bob

    The more obvious something is, the less reason there is for saying it (‘I have a belly button’).

    People who feel compelled to say things that should be obvious to EVERYONE are usually LYING. The inverse is typically true.

    Examples in industry:

    “This is a WONDERFUL place to work.”
    “I’m a GREAT Team Player.”
    “I’m REAL Easy To Work With.”
    “I’m ALWAYS On Time.”
    “The ladies Loooooooooove Me.” (different industry)
    “I See What You are saying here, BUUUUUUUT…..”
    “I Understand you, but what about…”
    “What do you think of THIS…(“Is THIS ‘perfect’ or what?”)

    ———————–

    Those who routinely and purposefully inject doubt into something that makes as much logical sense as it does actually work are not on your team. They are not your friend.

    ———————–

    The answer to the Moron Minimum & The Need To Say Rule:

    “Why do you feel you NEED to say that?”
    “Why do you feel you NEED to say ‘Race Does Not Exist?”
    “Why do you feel you NEED to say ‘Race Is a Social Construct?”
    “Why do you feel you NEED to say ‘There is no such thing as White Countries.”

    And as someone already wrote “WHO told you that you NEED to say that?”

    I’m Nuts about nuts (LOL!),
    Genseric

Comments are closed.