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

“-ist” Vs “-ism”

Posted by Undercover Lover on July 9th, 2012 under Uncategorized


I first read the mantra in 2010. I was still new to the consistent message thing but when I came across one line of the mantra, I knew I had to put it in every post I wrote. That line was:

“Anti-racist” is a codeword for anti-white.

But at the time I thought it sounded funny. The thing that sounded funny to me was the “-ist” part.

I was in a wordist mentality. I wanted to attack the word “Anti-racISM” so my “White nationalISM” could prevail. I quickly adopted that phrase and changed just ONE letter;

“Anti-racism” is a codeword for anti-white.

This is the one that sounds funny to me now.

I was in a wordist mentality. I believed that an “-ism” meant it was objective and true.

 

I know better now.

An “-ism” means whatever an “-ist” wants it to mean.

It doesn’t matter if one “-ist” says this about this “-ism” and another “-ist” says something completely different about that same “-ism.”

An “-ism” means whatever an “-ist” wants it to mean.

 

That is how the “anti-racists” were able to be so anti-white for so long and get away with it. We believed the “-ism” meant they were objective and true.

I now try to avoid using any “-ism” online or in any conversation.

And in almost every post I do, the last line I write is:

“Anti-racist” is a codeword for anti-white.

 

Share it now. Like it while you're at it.
  1. #1 by Gavin on 07/09/2012 - 10:19 am

    It’s an incredible feeling to be freed from the wordist cage. Actually looking at the real world and not some ideological fantasy land is cool.

    • #2 by Jason on 07/09/2012 - 10:27 am

      The concept of ‘wordism’ has helped me tremendously. But I was ready for it. The problem is most pro-Whites can’t escape their own wordism. Most of them have some “glorious plan” they want to sell. Or they get their kicks harkening back to a former German regime, which is just another form of wordism. As time goes on and we explain the concept, more people should break free.

  2. #3 by Dave on 07/09/2012 - 11:24 am

    No free people have “Founding Fathers”

    No free people worship documents (e.g. American Constitution)

    It is the duty of a slave to restore the honor of the house of his master.

    That is the real history of white people.

    No nonwhite people have ever freed themselves from slavery. To the extent they are free it is due to the insistence of white men.

    The nonwhite world DESPERATELY wants white people enslaved. They call this “equality”. All nonwhites have ever known is slavery. They know nothing else. Nonwhites think slavery is normative. They cannot perceive anything but slavery and they believe in slavery as a matter of “equality”.

    Political Correctness is merely the doctrine that white people be enslaved to suffer “equal” status with nonwhites.

    There is not a judge in existence that does have slavery as his or her highest value.

    Mommy Professor worships slavery above all else. Slavery is her highest value. She believes in slavery with all of her heart, soul and being.

    The premier slavery institution on earth is the United States Supreme Court. It is “slavery central” for the planet.

    • #4 by Dick_Whitman on 07/10/2012 - 5:40 pm

      This is really good insight. If you think about the two groups that call for speech laws the most in America, it’s Jews and blacks.

      It’s almost like they feel better with less freedom. It feels more natural to them. Of course they have the right to societies with less freedom, but they shouldn’t expect others to have to go along.

      Just think about this mind set. Wanting a law to make it illegal to say or write something. That’s a slave mentality.

      • #5 by six gun on 07/10/2012 - 6:28 pm

        They call for laws that will not be applied to them.
        These laws will be anti-racist and thus will be anti-White.

  3. #6 by shari on 07/09/2012 - 12:24 pm

    Dave, and when you think of the assorted freaks that make up “slavery central” there is a LOT of comedy material for a long time.

  4. #7 by six gun on 07/09/2012 - 1:44 pm

    What is the difference in “ism” and “ist” to the audience?

    Does it make any difference to them?
    Doubt it.

    • #8 by Gar5 on 07/09/2012 - 2:17 pm

      @ Sixgun

      In my opinion “IST” is an upsetting sound. It turns heads.

      It’s like a snake with it’s “HISS”.

      • #9 by six gun on 07/09/2012 - 2:45 pm

        “ist” is the same sound as “issed” as in Kissed.
        Depends on who you kissed as to whether it is upsetting.

        It doesn’t turn head b/c of the sound it turns heads b/c of conditioning.
        People are conditioned to react.

        I would use the most appropriate word.
        Racist may have slightly more impact as it is usually used to label a person so it may well trigger an emotional response.
        I’m so desensitised to this nonsense all of it has become laughable.

  5. #10 by Southern Nationalist on 07/09/2012 - 3:35 pm

    I’ve been reading BUGS for a couple months. And I know that’s a short time. But I think I understand the need to focus on White genocide and the power of being on a consistent message. In fact, I’ve learned a lot about such things from Bob and Horus. What I don’t understand it the objection to all isms. Take for example a healthy Frenchman. Is such a man not a French nationalist? He might understand that White people are being genocided out of existence and he might spend all his time fighting White genocide. But he’s also French. And there is a bond amongst French people. This bond is real. National identity is real and it’s organic (or at least can be). What is wrong with this?

    • #11 by Gavin on 07/09/2012 - 4:00 pm

      You are exactly right in your outlook but you are wrong in thinking that most of us here disagree with you. No one here is saying to sever ethnic and racial bonds. No one is saying that national identity is unimportant. In fact we are saying the exact opposite. These are the real organic connections and loyalties between people that are important…not some abstract ideology like “libertarianism” “progressivism” or even “nationalism” (when it becomes a dogma rather than a description)

  6. #12 by c-bear on 07/09/2012 - 8:28 pm

    Bob has literally spent YEARS of fine-tuning The Mantra. The smallest details aren’t noticed by most. You have to be around for a while – and out there using this stuff – before most of these are noticed. In my personal experience I have found that it is easier and most effective to stick with the original.

    • #13 by Daniel Genseric on 07/10/2012 - 12:18 am

      I can tell c-bear took some time to stop and actually think about this, as he always does.

      You can’t beat the real McCoy.

Comments are closed.