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

How Do Porcupines Make Love?

Posted by Bob on July 4th, 2012 under Coaching Session


The answer to that question is the same as the answer to “How do you go from coaching neophytes to coaching journeymen?”

How to change any bit of the Mantra approach now that you’re been out there a while?

Same answer again:

VERY carefully.

Ask your teammates.

And watch yourself! Try to be sure you are part of our general effort rather than deviating off into some theme of your own.

The term “mini-mantra” was not coined by me. At a certain point, the coaches begin making their own new language and their own practices, but all as a team and within the rules.

If you drift, you or your teammates must catch you.

Changes are taking place that I never wanted to discuss THEORETICALLY. Only those that know the game and have spent a lot of time on the field. should make the slightest adjustment.

Ask other team members here whether it WORKS. That is always a tough call.

But if you start throwing in religion or abortion or Jews in place of our only issue, I will raise hell.

Share it now. Like it while you're at it.
  1. #1 by Dave on 07/04/2012 - 1:50 pm

    “How do you go from coaching neophytes to coaching journeymen?”

    But what is a journeyman?

    I argue that a journeyman perceives a curriculum (path of learning) that solely belongs to him or her.

    The neophyte wants an a priori formal curriculum furnished for him or her (e.g., a curriculum that belongs to the “collective”).

    This is precisely what ails academia. Mommy Professor could not exist without an endless supply of neophyte students demanding a curriculum. Political Correctness BEGINS right there!

    There can be no such thing as a formal curriculum. There never was any such thing. The idea that an a priori formal curriculum exists is in the realm of magic.

    There is only destiny. Period.

    Contact with content is destiny. And there is no relation between contact with content and actual outcomes.

    A curse upon anyone that tries to turn the content of BUGS into a business. You haven’t the foggiest notion of what is really going on.

  2. #2 by six gun on 07/04/2012 - 2:51 pm

    I have not noticed anyone talking about religion other than the cult of political correctness.
    Jews? Not in a Mantra post! Quickest way I know how to get a ban.
    Abortion – well that certainly is an issue. Not one I have seen BUGsers deal with, but it is a major issue this side of the pond. The numbers have almost quadruples in the last 30 years. The figures does include the morning after pill.

    If people are drifting off the path it is in part b/c there need to be constant signposts.
    I now have a WordPress website on my main PC. I see there are chatroom and webinar plugin.
    I feel sure a weekly webinar would be popular.
    I can see a free webinar plugin which work with WordPress.

    If there is interested and if Bob is amenable and if the site can cope with it, I will have a look.

    If we are taking this forward I seriously think we need to use technology. I have been to quite a few webinars. The audience types and the speaker says his bit. Needs someone who can talk, is willing to talk and can talk sense.

    I have not used WordPress before today, but I am willing to have a crack.

    what I was looking at is
    http://www.blindsidenetworks.com/integrations/wordpress/

    He guy installing this is using Putty which needs permission from the server host to use on the server.

    First of all is there interest?

  3. #3 by Epiphany on 07/04/2012 - 4:20 pm

    None tend to think about what the world will be like when Whites really are bred out of existence. That is the main issue here! I am really annoyed by the drivel about the Browning of the Races. It will only lead to chaos.

  4. #4 by Jason on 07/04/2012 - 6:32 pm

    It takes discipline to stay on message, it is so tempting to go off on tangents. But, the discipline pays off. The last thing the other side wants to keep talking about is White Genocide.

  5. #5 by GregP on 07/04/2012 - 6:59 pm

    While we’re on the topic, I have a legitimate concern about the placement of one word in the mantra: “respectable.”

    When the mantra says, “. . . liberals and respectable conservatives,” it implies that the non-respectable conservatives agree with us; it implies that we are conservatives or that we are somehow alined or connected to them.

    Correct me if I’m wrong but my understanding is that at BUGS we are a single issue group — we’re fighting to stop white genocide, PERIOD. We do not, as a group, promote capitalism, communism, free markets, abortion, gay rights, gun rights or any other issue.

    My understanding is we want as many white people (and even some non-whites) to stand against white genocide as possible, and that we don’t care what their political affiliation is, how many abortions they’ve had, what their position on Jews is or even if they’re homosexual. Those are non-issues. Our only focus and concern is stopping white genocide.

    Now I know “respectable conservative” is a term Bob coined and is proud of, and Rightfully so. And I know he worked for and was a conservative for a long time. However, I think it distracts and detracts from the message. We’re not trying to get people to be non-respectable conservatives. We’re trying to get them to stand against the genocide of their own people! That crosses silly distinctions as “liberal” and “conservative.”

    So, when I SAY the mantra out loud, I’ve been saying “. . . *respectable* liberals and conservatives . . .” (with emphasis on respectable so it applies to both “liberals” and “conservatives”). But I am not happy with it because it’s still not CRYSTAL clear, AND it’s not very clear in text at all.

    Do any fellow BUGSers have any input on this?

    And yes, I’m relatively new and shouldn’t be messing with the mantra, I know. But this has been bothering me for a while and I think it’s important.

    • #6 by steadiness on 07/04/2012 - 10:24 pm

      the non-respectable conservatives agree with us

      This is correct. Respectable conservatives may or may not agree with us, some of them don’t, some of them do, some of them even secretly try to push a pro-white agenda

      To liberals, everything is about race, and to respectable conservatives, nothing is about race, especially race. Newt Gingrich said that he wants to be a jobs president, not a food stamps president. Liberals accuse him of racism, respectable conservatives say that more whites than blacks are on food stamps.

      A pro-white conservative is respectable until he says something over the line. Pat Buchanan recently crossed that line, now he’s out of MSNBC. John Derbyshire crossed that line, now he’s out of National Review. Every so often, you hear from our closet supporters, if you tweet me anything that even sounds racial I’ll block you.

      Recently, the Breitbart guys got a Politico reporter fired for saying that Mitt Romney is “more comfortable around white people”. This is a very new development that a liberal can get in trouble for playing the race card.

      The left grumbles about libertarians, but as long as those libertarians say that racism is a form of collectivism, they will be grudgingly accepted. The left doesn’t like neoliberal businessmen, but as long as they advocate for more immigration, hire lots of minorities, put minorities in their advertising and put up signs in Spanish, they will be grudgingly accepted. The left doesn’t like theocrats, but as long as they preach the gospel of political correctness to advocate that illegal aliens should be allowed to vote, they will be grudgingly accepted.

      It’s only the pro-white conservatives who are walking on eggshells.

      Last year, a bunch of angry people started Occupy Wall Street. The first thing they did was call for a pardon for convicted cop-killer Troy Davis. They raged about the banks for a while, but eventually the leftists drove everyone else out and now they’ve forgotten all about the banks, becoming yet another leftist organization. The #1 priority of the left is to agitate for more redistribution up the hierarchy of oppression.

      The people who agree with us are conservatives who are still walking on eggshells and conservatives who the left has successfully branded racist and pronounced excommunicate and anathema.

      Anyway, I recently realized the point of not tailgating. It doesn’t matter what arguments I make, because they will mod it to oblivion, and if I make them in their language to try to slip past the filters, it’s even counterproductive.

      All that matters is pushing the word anti-white.

      As soon as the enemy has to say “I’m not anti-white, but…” like how we have to say “I’m not racist, but…”, we will have won.

      • #7 by six gun on 07/05/2012 - 4:58 am

        All this explanation is American. You say neo-con in my country and you will get a blank look. Leftist doesn’t mean the same thing. Neo-liberal??? None of this exists, you will make more sense using Cockney rhyming slang.

        At the end of the day, this is propaganda we distribute here and it does not matter how true its content, if it does not connect with the audience it is useless. In deed it is worse than useless.

        In the UK the liberal and conservative terms mean political party members. Big C or little c, the reader will see a political party b/c the little c term is not nearly so commonly used. The Liberal in the Mantra is the political party as it is a big L.

        I Googled “conservative” with a restriction to UK pages. I just went through 6 pages. All the entries related to the Conservative political party and some appeared as a small c. It took until page 7 to find the Oxford dictionary to give traditional values. I find all the UK definitions but practically the first 6 pages of search returns tell me what I need to know.

        I came to the decision that “Liberals and respectable conservatives” would be read as party politicians in the UK, AND as people in a middle of the road position of authority. Did that convey a suitable message? I think it probably does. It is not mean quite the same as the US message but it doesn’t matter.

    • #8 by dungeoneer on 07/05/2012 - 12:03 am

      The mantra is tailored to the artificial political landscape we are forced to operate in.The Respectable Conservative thing is a vital attack on the traitors on the “right”.

      Using the mantra we create a visible divide between Respectable traitors and real conservatives who want to save their race (ensuring racial survival is a conservative concept).

  6. #9 by six gun on 07/04/2012 - 7:35 pm

    Hey Greg welcome aboard.
    I am not going to discuss the liberals and conservatives. I have been there already and I would say I have posted Mantra speak thousands of times but have only posted the full Mantra half a dozen times. I would never otherwise post this line.

    The essence of this blog posting is we are a one issue group, at least for now.
    We must not get detoured off point.
    The psychology of this propaganda is we repeat and repeat and repeat….and then repeat the same message – AND we stick to a limited number of points.

    As a separate issue, if a whole bunch of Jewish people said enough of this, our daughters have started dating black guys, I for one would not reject their support. If Blacks said we want our own Nations separate from you White people, we would say we support you. Really anyone who is taking steps which act to stop White genocide I would give them a thumbs up. They can be a Black Jewish gay anti-gun person but if they support steps that stop White genocide then great.

  7. #10 by Dick_Whitman on 07/05/2012 - 10:18 pm

    Is there a way of knowing if BUGS received our writings.

  8. #11 by The Seeker of Truth on 07/09/2012 - 6:07 pm

    Never, ever mention the only country on the planet that openly declares that it exists for one people and one people only.

Comments are closed.