The other day a Social Justice Warrior (SJW) walked into a restaurant and saw in BIG neon writing a sign on the wall: “Supreme(!) Pizzas”…
dot dot dot
-Looking upwards for a few seconds in disbelief- 
Here is the SJW’s verbal response:
“I’m so sorry Seafood!
I’m so so sorry Margherita and Hawaiian! I mean that too. I’m soo so sorry. Look at what minority pizzas have to deal with.
These f***ing goofballs putting up f***ing billboards, talking about “supreme” pizzas. SUPREME pizzas!…
SUPREME pizzas!
Could you imagine if the pizza situations were reversed?! And in this Twilight Zone the Hawaiian Pizzas were the ones imposing supremacism and segregation on Supreme Pizzas?
To acknowledge the REALITY of Pizza relations is what is intelligence. It is understanding facts. It is being HONEST about the facts.”
Having gesticulated, the SJW then BOUGHT a “Supreme Pizza”. To eat. But at the same time to PROTEST. Pizza supremacism…..
#1 by Electric on 06/06/2015 - 10:46 pm
This is an prime example of how our enemies work, they don’t care how stupid they look or what anyone thinks of them. They just get things done, it shows us where they get their success from.
We have an advantage however. Instead of spreading lies ‘diversity is a strength’ we just keep pointing out the OBVIOUS truth over and over again; ‘diversity is a code word for White Genocide’ until it become’s IMPOSSIBLE to ignore.
I got into an outlaw biker documentary and the meme & rule they spread amongst each other is “take Care of Business.”
#2 by Electric on 06/06/2015 - 10:46 pm
Duplicate
#3 by polydoros on 06/08/2015 - 4:40 am
lol I love the picture, BBG! 😀
#4 by polydoros on 06/08/2015 - 4:48 am
Further to HD’s thoughtful comments from the previous article:
http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/2015/06/02/if-whites-had-gay-rights-recap/#comments
Even though weaponization to psych. warfare is incomplete, HD hit important points.
To add some background:
William D. Crano’s “The Rules of Influence: Winning When You’re in the Minority”.
Here is a review:
‘First, the bad news:the first seventy pages or so are just so much throat clearing. Now the good news:Page 70 forward set out clearly(for the most part), in digestable and discrete rules how to influence the majority to see your point of view. The linchpin is that the majority must see the minority as a legitimate part of the majority. Crano expertly describes how the opponents of Prop 8 in California(prohibiting same sex marriage) lost;namely, they failed to normalize gays as part of the majority by having ads showing gay couples doing what hetro couples do—buying homes, going to work, living their lives. He sums it up:”…the minority must become recognized as a legitimate part of the larger group. Unless the campaign accomplished this, the opposition to the marriage ban was destined to fail—and it did.” He alos lays out that the key to persuasion, after meeting this threshold, is to be persistent, consisitent, and unwilling to concede(but be flexible in how you achieve your goals). A worthwhile addition to persuasion literature.’
http://www.amazon.com/The-Rules-Influence-Winning-Minority/dp/0312552297
NB! The decisive battle was to ‘NORMALIZE gays’, and to be persistent in the message…
#5 by polydoros on 06/08/2015 - 4:53 am
So how about we use the term “White and normal”/”normal White people” more often?
White and normal.
Maybe it sounds clunky, but there is something deep to it.
It implies that we are the majority, natural and non-extreme.
And it implies that the real problem is with WHITE anti-Whites/self-hating freaks. There’s nothing normal about hating yourself. Self-hatred is sick!!!
#6 by Secret Squirrel on 06/08/2015 - 12:01 pm
I understand why Bob doesn’t like White and Normal now. Its exactly what Conservatives do. Always trying to be popular, they are terrified of losing their precious respectability, so it is child’s play to move them.
The power of the BUGS approach, is we don’t give a damn if we are liked. We do not ever defend ourselves, we attack, attack, attack.
#7 by polydoros on 06/09/2015 - 5:50 am
The reason I wrote this was for a few reasons:
-To create the impression that it is normal for White people to oppose White genocide.
-To use the word “normal” as bait for anti-Whites, so we can counter with: “There’s nothing normal about hating yourself. Self-hatred is sick!!!”
-That meme would now have a workable context. And it cuts through the main IMPRESSIONS that White anti-Whites give of THEMSELVES. As Bob himself has said:
… ‘two underlying sub-messages anti-whites keep sending out.
The first is that they are Idealistic, because they are whites who hate whites.
The second is that whites hating themselves is somehow Modern and Progressive.’
…
What I’m proposing is a tactic used effectively throughout the ages. One WANTS the enemy to attack at a certain place, and you are then ready to completely annihilate them when they take the bait.
“There’s nothing normal about hating yourself. Self-hatred is sick!!!”
#8 by Henry Davenport on 06/09/2015 - 11:27 am
“I understand why Bob doesn’t like White and Normal now. Its exactly what Conservatives do. Always trying to be popular, they are terrified of losing their precious respectability, so it is child’s play to move them.”
I didn’t know that Bob had ever said he didn’t like “white and normal.” If you can easily provide a link, I’d like to read his remarks.
Unlike conservatives, pro-whites have no respectability to lose yet. I very much like polydoros’ remarks just above about using “normal” as bait.
#9 by Henry Davenport on 06/09/2015 - 12:05 pm
The decisive battle was to ‘NORMALIZE gays’, and to be persistent in the message…
In that regard, I can imagine it being effective to mix the explicit “White and normal” with (my suggestion of experimenting with) the implicit appropriation of the word “White” to mean “pro-white.”
But I’m a little wary of all this excitement (including my own) over the possibility of having additional tactics. I think our excitement is partly the result of our desire to have more outlet for our creative energies, and I suspect we’d be better off focusing our creative energies on figuring out new ways to get our same-old-same-old into the public arena. The “Anti-White of the Month” project that will hopefully be launched soon is one such project. I’ve been studying (but I’m not a quick study) Ryan Holiday’s “Confessions of a media manipulator” that has been mentioned before, and I hope to get a feel for a lot of blogs and how to enlist their assistance in the project. As Bob has said, that book could be very helpful. I could sure use some collaboration with anyone who is possibly interested, but I don’t want to take anyone away from swarming.
The normalization will occur in due time IMO just from making the terms “anti-white” and “white genocide,” and our simplest memes that use those terms as well as our simple explanation of White Genocide, a part of commonplace speech and discussion. Ways to accelerate that process is what we should principally be putting our creative energies into IMO.
#10 by polydoros on 06/10/2015 - 5:01 am
I agree.
#11 by polydoros on 06/08/2015 - 5:00 am
Furthermore, to sideline opposition as “extremist” is a powerful strategy.
Subliminal Manipulation. How Media and Advertising Uses Neurolinguistic Mind Control Programming
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f9E2C4wpBi4
Notice how Alan Colmes uses his gesture to show that the 911 investigator was non-mainstream.
Now bearing in mind the word “pro-White”, can anyone here explain (without N&Jing) the following?: Alan Colmes and other Jews DON’T use the word “pro-Semite” but they DO use the word “anti-Semite”.
#12 by -Gar5- on 06/08/2015 - 7:45 pm
I’m glad you brought this up. I was also thinking about this a few weeks ago.
Gays don’t call themselves ‘pro-gay’, they instead call themselves ‘gay-friendly’.
‘White friendly’ is a very unused term (at least on the internet). I will be using this term where I can.
Other Bugsters, please give it a try too. It reinforces our anti-White meme.
Lets face it: ‘pro-White’ has a lot of emotional baggage tied to it and ‘White and normal’ as a meme is not spreading.
#13 by Electric on 06/08/2015 - 8:09 pm
“Are you White-friendly or pro-White genocide?”
#14 by Secret Squirrel on 06/08/2015 - 10:55 pm
Of course they use it. They use Philo-Semitism. There is a wiki entry for it, making it sound nice and friendly. Anything else would be “defamation”.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philo-Semitism
If you search for “Pro White” Wikipedia returns White Supremacy, Discrimination and Nazism. This is not “racial defamation”, because according to anti-Whites, Whites can’t be defamed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_supremacy
Why don’t they use Pro-Semitic? Probably as a deliberate tactic, to distance themselves from Pro White, which anti-Whites are defaming for the purposes of White Genocide.
#15 by Denounce Genocidists on 06/08/2015 - 5:53 am
I don`t see it as a case of either/ or.
There`s a time for using white and normal, a time for using pro-white, and a time for using both.
Jews don`t need to use pro-Semite because Jewish loyalty is a given. They do use pro-Israel:
http://www.stopbds.com/?page_id=1301
“The term “pro-Israel” is used routinely to describe Americans who are sympathetic toward the state of Israel”
#16 by Bob on 06/08/2015 - 9:30 am
Why do I have to point out to polydoros that one sentence above is the kind of thing BUGS has spent trying to get AWAY from?
Our aim is to hit and run, not to present a correct image of OURSELVES.
You know that, but I want you to look carefully at that sentence.
#17 by polydoros on 06/09/2015 - 5:55 am
I’ll think carefully about what you wrote, and I was aware of this irony.
I wrote a reply to Secret Squirrel about my reasoning for this above.
#18 by Henry Davenport on 06/08/2015 - 8:49 pm
I’m not getting this blog…
I don’t recall ever having to use the term “pro-White” (or any substitute for it) when swarming. What is the need to introduce any such term at all?
The term “Pro-Semite” doesn’t exist because it would set up a dichotomy (pro-semite and anti-semite) that isn’t desired (and for the same reason I don’t think we should introduce the term “pro-white” when swarming). There is normal decency, and there is “anti-semite,” which is the distinction that’s desired.
Gays have only recently staked a strong claim to be accepted simply out of normal decency, so “gay friendly” is still a step forward for them, whereas “jew friendly”…lol!…big step backwards.
I think “white friendly” is a distraction from our message.
I think Bob has generally liked “pro-white” at least in some contexts. I don’t understand what Bob is getting at in his comment to polydoros.
#19 by Secret Squirrel on 06/08/2015 - 11:09 pm
“I don’t recall ever having to use the term “pro-White” ”
Bob has always used Pro White that I remember. He once advised us to refer to ourselves as Pro White, instead of White Nationalist.
If anything Bob has taught me, it is to be as SPECIFIC as possible, so no one can misunderstand you. Pro White/anti-White is also about forcing people to make a CHOICE. Are you Pro White like me, or are you anti-White like them? Choose A or B. Choose Heaven or Hell.
Your anti-White without pro White is like a one sided coin, which is IMPOSSIBLE!
#20 by Henry Davenport on 06/09/2015 - 6:00 am
“I don’t recall ever having to use the term “pro-White” ”
Secret Squirrel, that’s not what I said. I use that term frequently (but as I said, I don’t recall ever needing to use it swarming), and I doubt I’ve used the term “White Nationalist” even once since discovering BUGS.
Bob endorsed “pro-White,” but is he okay with us using it swarming? I’m not saying he’s not, I’m saying I don’t know.
I’ve never liked the term and I wince when I write it, but I think all the substitutes for it are worse, with the possible exception of just “White.” But I feel confusion over that possibility too.
I always accept Bob’s judgment of matters like this over my own, unless when using something I find problems with it. I haven’t found any problems with “pro-white” while swarming because I never used it. If the rest of you are using it swarming and it seems to work, and Bob’s cool with it, I withdraw any objection to it. I won’t use it myself, because I have no feel for it as a tool. For reasons I may not understand, the term simply bothers me.
I’m not “pro-White,” I’m WHITE. I grew up when to be White was to be pro-white. So pro-white sounds artificial to me. And I suddenly just remember that Truck Roy had a short little monologue on the radio recently saying much the same thing…in fact I think he said something like, “I’m not pro-white, I’m WHITE.” I remember now that I was very happy to hear someone expressing the same feelings about those two terms that I have.
#21 by Henry Davenport on 06/08/2015 - 9:03 pm
My last comment appeared out of order…maybe this one will too.
As I said, I don’t think “pro-white” or any other such term should be introduced in swarming.
But when writing on SF, I usually say (if I’m thinking) “White websites,” not “pro-White websites,” because I don’t want to put out “pro-White” as being something special when it should be normal. And as I commented on the last blog, I like the idea of appropriating “White” to mean “White and normal, pro-White.” (And at the moment, I’m just talking about outside the context of swarming).
Hm, but putting myself in the shoes of some mainstream white visitor to SF, if he sees pro-Whites are appropriating the term “White” for themselves, will that make him feel even less like wanting to identify as being White? And also make him feel even more that “White” is becoming a marginalized state? Maybe I could say “our White websites,” which introduces a slight distinction.
As for swarming, I could see saying this to an anti-white:
“Are you a White who opposes White Genocide or supports White Genocide?”
#22 by Electric on 06/08/2015 - 10:02 pm
Is diversity White-friendly or White-Genocide?
#23 by Henry Davenport on 06/08/2015 - 10:50 pm
I like that, Electric. A lot, at least at first take. It looks good on a billboard to me! Great interaction between the two terms.
But (having second thoughts) it might be better just to have “Diversity is a code word for White Genocide” over and over and over.
#24 by Secret Squirrel on 06/08/2015 - 11:14 pm
Can’t believe people are actually discussing dropping Pro White, on the only 100% Pro White blog on the planet.
#25 by Electric on 06/08/2015 - 11:20 pm
Not talking about dropping Pro-White. Just brainstorming. “Are you pro-White or pro-White genocide? Is Diversity White-friendly or White Genocide?”
#26 by Jason on 06/09/2015 - 2:01 am
One difference between Whites and other groups is: Whites have a significant number of Whites who are Anti-White. Gays don’t have that. Blacks don’t. No other group does.
So we have real life White Anti-Whites to deal with which may require the use of ‘Pro-White’ to distinguish us (and point out their treason).
What if Gays had a lot of homosexuals who were truly Anti-Gay? Would those who were advocating for Gays feel the need to point it out they were not just Gay but Pro-Gay?
I’m not sure but I think it changes the terminology needed.
#27 by Secret Squirrel on 06/09/2015 - 3:15 am
“Whites have a significant number of Whites who are Anti-White. ”
Many on SF do not see it that way. They see Whites as one group and will forgive any treason, because it is the other group that makes them betray.
This is something Bob warned us about. When the anti-Whites are kicked out of power, there will be calls to forgive and forget and then the White anti-Whites will return to power and do it to us all over again.
So these forgivers are the start of the chain of White Genocide. White Genocide begins again with pro Whites that tolerate treason. That is why we have pro White and anti-White and why we will have genocide prosecutions.
#28 by Jason on 06/09/2015 - 6:36 am
“So these forgivers are the start of the chain of White Genocide”
Absolutely great point. I think that is why I bristled so much when other pro-Whites would talk about forgiving some poor little White Anti-White because she had been “brainwashed”. Excuse my language but horses*t.
Bob has this great article on forgiveness. Yes, after proper contrition there can be forgiveness. We need to be thinking about what kind of demands we should make of those who claim “they’ve seen the light” when it comes to White Genocide in the future.
http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/2007/10/22/cheap-forgiveness-is-fatal/
#29 by Henry Davenport on 06/10/2015 - 9:53 am
Good point by SS and you, and great explanation of it by Bob at your link!
I’m a long ways from feeling contrition. When I displayed that lack in Bob’s presence, he called me on it.
After victory, I should not be made Minister of Contrition.
#30 by Denounce Genocidists on 06/09/2015 - 6:54 am
Hilarious.HD has admitted he does`nt do much swarming but feels compelled to suggest to swarmers both veteran and apprentice not to use the pro-white vs anti-white terminology.
Polydoros, thank you for the funny and thought-provoking article.
#31 by -Gar5- on 06/09/2015 - 8:04 am
@ Bob- I suggest we at least try out ‘White friendly’.
This is not about our image, this is about expanding our vocabulary.
Simplify your points; expand your vocabulary so you can better make those points.
Others have asked whether we should call ourselves anything. This is not about our tiny group. This is about the majority.
What will THEY call themselves?
#32 by Bob on 06/09/2015 - 9:00 am
This is a GREAT discussion!
You sound like the pros you are!
It was a strategy talk among comrades, rather than someone going into a snit and the conversation veering off into that.
Gar5, BUGSERS NEVER say “We ought to try this…”
One of our basic rules is “try it and report.”
The Old Man has to tut-tut somebody.
#33 by -Gar5- on 06/09/2015 - 11:46 am
You’re right. I jumped the gun on this one. I will try it out.
But you must admit that you have broken your own rule in the past when you suggested we use the ‘screamers and thought police’ meme and the ‘chasing down Whites’ meme. 🙂
#34 by polydoros on 06/10/2015 - 5:07 am
(The following was written before the latest round of responses, and I don’t have to change a word:)
Brainstorming. And in response to the questions I asked, I agree with Bob and Secret Squirrel.
Some things to take away from this brainstorming:
1. “Pro-White” is an accurate term but unsuitable for swarming. (I’ve never used the word while swarming.)
2. While swarming we can say what we are DOING.
“We are protesting White Genocide. Are you for or against White Genocide?”
3. While swarming, we can IMPLY what we are. (A Subbasic.)
E.g. When someone says they don’t care about White Genocide.
Response: “People of conscience care about genocide.”
…
As for the advanced maths that Bob set out for us (in “Diversity = White Genocide = Self-Hatred = SICK!!!” and subsequent articles), that is still an open question.
#35 by Jason on 06/10/2015 - 7:27 pm
Pro-Whites in the past thought the White masses were secretly on our side and ready to march in the streets RIGHT NOW.
That led to bad propaganda because it assumes we just need to project a “strong image” that Whites will rally behind. It was tried to comical effect for 60 years. Whites rejected them so the old pro-Whites doubled down on crazy which just marginalized them more.
Pro-Whites in the past didn’t understand there was a need to make White existence socially legitimate. And beyond BUGS, they are still confused on that point.
The BUGS message is getting out but that doesn’t mean there will be millions of White people taking to the street TOMORROW. The anti-White glacier is melting but it takes time. Conservatives I talk to are as scared of RACE as ever.
When the “revolution” fails to immediately appear, a lot of pro-Whites turn on each other in frustration.
#36 by Tom Bowie on 06/10/2015 - 8:35 pm
I often find I use the term Pro-White somewhat differently than others may think of it. Asking “Is this good for White people” does not come easy.
Terminology can be and often is flexible depending on conditions and the person. There is very limited wiggle room the more specific the terminology is.
When I get the question “What is a Pro-White” or what do you mean by “White and Normal”; I have an indication of what I’m dealing with.
#37 by Yankee Rebel on 06/11/2015 - 12:59 am
I agree that “Pro-White” has negative connotations attached to it, but I am not fond of any alternatives I have heard so far. Perhaps in time, “Pro-White” will lose some its negative meanings and become a positive term or a better term will emerge. I am sticking to it until then.