Archive for category History

Perot’s Peak and our 2016 Campaign

If you want to see The Silence at work, look at Wikipedia’s piece on Ross Perot.

It is a long series of put-downs and awkward incidents in Perot’s life.

If you mention Perot to anyone today, he will either not recognize the name or repeat one of those put-downs.

You can tell it causes real pain for Wikipedia to repeat the one unique thing in Perot’s life that The Silence wants minimized.

They do not devote a sentence to it. It is part of the sentence: “In June of 1992, national polls showed Perot leading the sitting President and the Democratic nominee with 39 percent of the popular vote!”  photo perot.jpg

This never happened before or since.

But because of the cloud of crap everybody throws out when Perot’s name is mentioned, The Silence covers this critical history with drivel.

And everybody repeats it.

Perot came out of nowhere. In an interview on Larry King at CNN, King asked him why he himself did not run for president.

Larry King was not a popular show back then, but the mail this question generated was overwhelming, with demands for Perot to go on the ballot.

The idea did not come from Perot.

Wikipedia then makes up a figure of gigillions of his own dollars the power-mad Perot put into his campaign.

A man who had no idea he was going to be drafted is portrayed as power mad.

But others have spent more than Perot did without any effect at all.

To someone who is as familiar with MediaSpeak as I am, Wikipedia gave out the usual dirt to cover the one point The Silence must avoid:

In June of 1992, national polls showed Perot leading the sitting President and the Democratic nominee with 39 percent of the popular vote!

Nothing is as important as this is to a Party seeking to overthrow the establishment.

When Perot got up to 39 percent, the Almighty USSR had simply fallen apart.

“Not with a blast but with a whimper.”

In fact, not even a whimper!

Perot’s platform was Saying the Unsayable.

He refused to accept Business As Usual in politics.

He Said the Unsayable to both the left and the kept “opposition.”

In the national debate, both Perot and his vice presidential candidate were asked about abortion.

Instead of trying to get the “dissatisfied” vote of anti-abortionists, they said what most voters think: It’s not an issue with them.

At a time when the Internet was new, Perot proposed to do something that scared politicians half to death: Perot wanted issues to be subjected to a spontaneous poll online. He wanted the PEOPLE to get in on it!

Perot’s Lesson is hidden behind bits of dirt about him just as grassroots rebellion is hidden under Abortion and the chasing down of Whites is hidden behind details about Hitler’s mustache.

The only other real threat to the ruling parties was Wallace in 1968. He got less than 14 percent of the vote, but his American Party is still more active than other third parties.

Perot’s party was destroyed by Pat Buchanan. It gave him its nomination in 2000.

Buchanan had won the New Hampshire primary against Bush.

Then Buchanan turned into a harmless theocrat.

He accepted the Perot Party nomination and then spent all his time attacking abortion and evolution.

His polls started up at a respectable – for a third party – several percent of the vote and then dropped like a rock.

He ended with a vote down where the Prohibition Party gets today, and falling.

The American Freedom Party can become important only if its theme is: “We ain’t going to take it anymore!”

Perot was gotten out of the campaign by the thugs going after his daughter, something any BUGSER can clearly understand.

No Marxists. No theocrats.

Samizdat.

7 Comments

The King of TTGHs

From January to December, 1936, Edward VIII was King of England.

He was openly and totally pro-Hitler.

His ambition was to get Germany a means to attack the USSR directly.

Edward VIII gave up his crown to marry Mrs. Simpson, a divorced woman who was working on her second divorce. As head of the Church of England, he had to give up his crown.

Hitler said that, if he had been warned and could get to the King, he might have prevented the abdication.

Edward VIII went to Germany to celebrate his marriage! He was that openly pro-Hitler!

In his demoted position as Royal Duke, Edward was sent to work in Paris, but removed because he was so pro-German! During the Blitz, he wrote letters to Berlin supporting the Blitz, because, as is true, Britain started open civilian bombing.

The King still had enormous powers. Staying out of politics is entirely voluntary. No declaration of war could have been effected without the monarch’s signature. The House of Lords gave us its right to block legislation, like war, because the King had announced in the early 1830’s that, if they tried it, the King would appoint peers to give the democratic ones the majority. photo edwardviii.jpg

And in 1939, the peers were overwhelmingly opposed to war.

Pat Buchanan wrote a book about how insane the British September of 1939 declaration of war against Germany was.

Without that declaration, Germany would have expended its energies against Russia. Germany would have won, but their dumbass Napoleonic strategy would have taken war out of fashion and the Lebensraum would have been won.

Britain would have returned a long way toward monarchy and the European Empires would have remained. The United States would still be largely isolationist outside of the Monroe Doctrine, and Britain and Germany would jointly rule the world.

We would have gone after our Communists here and in South America.

But King Edward wanted his way. He wanted to defy all those who would limit him.

In the end, his decision was TTGH. If he wasn’t allowed to do what he wanted, he would Take His Toys and Go Home in the name of Romance.

TTGH: As a Matter of Principle – or Romance – we will have our own way and the cause be damned.

21 Comments

Any Real Truth Can Handle Reality

In my article and talk about the lack of a GENETICAL morality in Christianity, I repeated at least half a dozen times that nobody, not even the snake handling preachers in the mountains will still insist that everything in Genesis is true.

This is not making fun of the Bible itself. In the Bible Belt, it simply meant that we must take into account errors in literal, worldly truths.

Even the Flat Earth Society is a joke. Genesis was understood as demanding a flat earth, and that the earth is the center of the universe.  photo stars.jpg

It just ain’t so. But an engineering family in the Bible Belt didn’t burn its holy books because of it. So if we finally just admit that the world did not come to an end when the New Testament repeatedly said it would, and every Christian had to believe it, it is simply something stated that was wrong, like the geocentric universe.

The reason I bring this up is because this is certainly not a problem limited to the Bible. I have written dozens of times about the horrible errors in medicine that killed Lord knows how many people.

But if one contradicted Galen at Oxford before 1700, the University Thought Police would fine him. It is amazing how often people were accused of heresy because they contradicted a pagan like Aristotle, because the Pope had used a quote from one of the ancient Greeks in his decisions.

In Renaissance Universities, it was very difficult to tell whether you were supposed to be contradicting Scripture or a philosopher.

We have inherited this problem.

It was a psychological shock for Europe when Newton came along because every single hallowed conjecture about the composition of the universe, Greek or Hebrew, was superseded. All the glass universes with stars in them set up to surround earth by ALL the ancients just disappeared.

It is said that the Catholic Church was so exhausted from denouncing Newton and Copernicus that it left fighting Evolution to the Protestants.

The establishment today is not any different from the old one.

Political Correctness fights as hard for its Old Religion as any Inquisitor ever did.

The fact is that, in the real world, skin color IS everything. Like the Medieval Church Political Correctness fights a simple reality.

I do not know WHY this reality exists any more than Greek philosophers actually knew how you could get all those stars up there without a stage set up in the sky.

9 Comments

Tibet

Mommy Professor says that the key to a great future is education and sterility.

This has been tried in India and Tibet.

As I said before, India was taken over by the Brahman Caste as it transitioned from White to colored. The Sanskrit word for “caste” is “color.”

Now New Agers, following Mommy Professor’s path, go to India to find the Wisdom of the Gurus, who are the very picture of brown India in their towels and diapers.  photo buddhasgirl.png

And, like the American college campus, Tibet’s emphasis on Education is wiping out the supply of potential students. The teachers are monks who become monks simply by donning the robe – like our judges and academics, these guys seem to be wild about wearing dresses.

Yuppies have only one or two children – PC says none – because each child requires a giant sum of money to feed Mommy Professors, or “get a college education.”

Tibet’s monks are self-sterilized, like Medieval monks. They call themselves Buddhists. Like any other any sect they consider themselves The Only True Buddhists.

Gautama Buddha himself made a major point of the fact he had one child, a girl.

I repeat, the Buddha himself made a POINT of having a daughter.

Knowing politics as I do, I think Buddha emphasized that child for a reason.

In the struggle between Brahman (Mommy Professors) and Tschatria (the old warrior ruling class) the blue-eyed Brahman was probably denounced for being sterile. So Buddha made a major point of NOT being without issue.

I can think of no other reason he would emphasized his daughter so much.

In Tibet, of course, sterility is the Only True Faith. The place has been depopulated by the army of monk-teachers, and the Chinese are moving in.

“History is made by those who show up for it.”

11 Comments

Mommy Professor in India

In India, Mommy Professor wears a towel on his head and a diaper on his ass.

For two thousand years Indian Mommy Professors have been considered to be the Height of Wisdom. The Brahman sits in his diaper while around him children collapse in hunger, and every University rings with his praises.

When the Aryan warrior class invaded India and set up a culture, the warriors, the Tschatriya, were at the top of the Caste system. “Caste” means color in English, just as is the Indian Sanskrit term for caste was the same word as “color.”

Just before India began its slide into sub-third world status, the Brahman became the top caste.

The Brahman are the Priests, the Intellectuals.

The Mommy Professors.

The Indian civilization developed Kung Fu, Buddhism, and the aquatic rice we associate with Oriental countries and “the paddy culture.”  photo blueeyedbuddha.jpg

Buddhism originated in India, and Buddhists point out that the Buddha, “had eyes the color of blue lotus.” The man who brought Kung Fu to China also had bright blue eyes.

In a coincidence that is not historically unique, India’s Aryan conquerors devoted themselves to Wisdom, became brown and collapsed into a starving mess with only little brown Wise Men to show for it.

In the end period for White India, you might not have recognized the group that would be Wise Men of Colored India. They probably looked a great deal like Mommy Professor today rather than the little guy in the diaper with the begging bowl.

Mommy Professor in the White World has on a coat and tie and gets his money from taxation backed by force. When the Warrior Class gave the Brahman the top notch in the color system, the Brahman was probably as well financed as Mommy Professor is today.

In the future colored world, Mommy Professor will be trying to peddle his Wisdom on the streets, as anyone who reads Genseric’s “The Bubble” below will understand.

27 Comments

Explaining the 1932 German election to Americans (and Aussies).

I taught this stuff so I forgot how complicated it is.

Let me know if this does not explain it.

Some BUGSERS have trouble with how Germany’s government was formed in 1932.

In the United States the president and congress are elected separately. 

However, in most places there is a single election for the single ruling House, like the House of Commons in Britain.

Americans are used to an orderly, timed changes of government. Our elections are in November, but the old congressmen and the old president stay in office until January, the “transition” period.   It used to be that those elected only took office in March, four months after the election.

This makes the way they change governments in Europe very confusing to us.

In Britain, there is only one election, and that election is for every Member of Parliament on the same day. If that election goes against the party in power, every office from Prime Minister down to MP (Member of Parliament) changes.

Right after Election Day, if the party in power loses, a new government must be formed.

This has happened many, many times. The moment the Labor Party got a majority in the House of Commons in 1945, the Prime Minister, Winston Churchill, suddenly had to leave Number Ten Downing Street, their White House.

In the European form of government, the old government disappears at the top and a complete new government must be formed.

Here is the part that confuses Americans: The new government must be supported by a majority of members of the one elected House selected in that one election.

Nowadays, no one party ever gets a majority in the British Parliament. So they have to form a coalition in order to form any government or elect any prime minister. I have long since lost track, but the last British Government I remember was a coalition of Conservative and Liberal Democrat Parties.

Back in the fifties, the Governments of France and Italy were standing jokes. They would form a new Government every few DAYS, as members of Parliament formed new coalitions and then fell out with each other.

To Americans, this would be a weird way to run a country store, much less a GOVERNMENT!

I repeat: in this Bizarro way of running a government, there is no government unless it is backed by a MAJORITY of the one elected house.

There is no end to the number of disasters this can lead to. One of these disasters occurred in the Weimar Republic after the election of 1932.

Between the two, the Communists and the Nazis, they had a MAJORITY of the total membership of the newly elected ruling House.  photo 3-1933election.jpg

The ONLY House Germany has forms a government!

You could not form a government without a majority.

Basic arithmetic: If two (2) parties hold a majority, one of the two must be included if you are to form ANY new government. So the 1932 election meant that ANY new government must include either Nazis or Communists.

I did NOT say the Nazis and Communists got together. What I said was that those people who voted Communist caused this situation, as Nazi voters did.

The new government HAD to include either Communists or Nazis.

Hitler owned a third of the Reichstag. A government required a majority vote. Hitler formed a coalition with other right-wing German parties.

No, the Nazis and the Communists did not come together. When Hitler took power his coalition then Hitler formed a coalition with the tiny right-wing National Party. Kicking out the Reds made the Reichstag arithmetic even better. With a sixth of its members kicked out, Hitler’s third got even closer to a majority. There were 83% of the delegates left, and Hitler owned 33% of those delegates.

A snap election was called, during which the Reichstag burned down and the Communists got blamed. The Nazis ran against politically handicapped opponents in March. This further improved their numbers.

Hitler was at last able to declare a State of Emergency and he then threw all the other parties out of the Reichstag and Germany was run by the Nazis in that State of Emergency until May of 1945.

Is this understandable?

22 Comments

Be Careful What You Ask For – the 1932 GERMAN Election

In the 1932 German election, the Nazi Party got exactly a third of the vote and the Stalinist Communist Party got exactly one in six. Together the two totalitarian parties got half of the vote and a bare majority of the seats in the Reichstag.

This produced a milestone in history: The next German government would have to include Communists or Nazis. Hermann Goering presided over the Reichstag because the Nazi constituted the plurality.

Please note what history never mentions: It took two to tango: The Communists elected Hitler every bit as much as Nazis did.

How did the German Jews vote in 1932?

If you take out the Nazi third, that leaves two thirds of the electorate. If Jews voted proportionately, one in four would have voted for a Stalinist State.

But the fact is that Jews traditionally vote for the left, the far left. Even William Buckley said that “Jews live like Episcopalians and vote like Puerto Ricans.” The Founder of Commentary, the Jewish conservative magazine stated flatly, “For most Jews the term ‘conservative Jew’ as an oxymoron.” photo warongermans.jpg

Until I wrote this article, no experienced political analyst would doubt that in 1932 Jews voted at least 2 to 1 for the Communist Party.

Which in this story as it turned out, was the same as voting FOR Hitler!

Be careful what you ask for!

German Jewish voters in 1932 WANTED concentration camps.

They DEMANDED an absolute dictatorship.

They saw the Terror Lenin bragged about and called it good.

The 1932 Jewish electorate asked for it and they GOT it, secret police, concentration camps, the whole nine yards.

Be careful what you ask for.

And where in this story do we find the SuperJews, those who know all and determine all?

What the German Jews did in 1932 was not exactly penetrating SuperKnowledge. They voted for concentration camps and secret police, and they GOT concentration camps and secret police.

But those wonderful concentration camps and secret police got THEM, not the goyim Stalinists were after.

And it is impossible to analyze the 1932 German election without concluding that a higher percentage of Jews voted for dictatorship and concentration camps than German gentiles.

Is this All-Knowing Jewish Genius at work?

Or is it a people with a grudge being maliciously stupid?

This 1932 election is bad for both Jews and monomaniacal anti-Semites.

Neither Jews nor monomaniacal anti-semites want German Jews portrayed as a group of morons whose hatred of those around them exploded in their faces.

Audio Bob

62 Comments

Ending the Rule By Billionaires

Hitler said in Mein Kampf  that he had no interest whatever in economics or economic theory.

When Hitler took power, he almost magically ended the German Depression, which was, even in the 1930s, the world’s worst.

Roosevelt, whose basic ideology was economic, was still struggling with the Depression in 1940. Under the New Deal the Depression would have gone on another ten years at least.

Communism is based entirely on an economic theory. The entire Soviet system finally collapsed simply because the system was ridiculous.

China still had people starving until the last twentieth century under Communism. Japan had long since achieved a Western standard of living.

China is still very poor compared to Japan.

Hitler was a wizard in economics because he just used what worked. What destroyed him was the area where he DID have an ideology, the Lebensraum Doctrine. As Lenin obsessed with economics, Hitler was obsessed with his military.

There is, as usual, a simple rule here which academics get paid to ignore:

You can’t solve real problems with solutions that are fixed by some old ideology you are obsessed with.

Hitler ended the Depression which brought him into power, and he did it efficiently and quickly. In 1936 it was generally agreed that he was the most popular leader any country on earth had.

Now let us jump abruptly from the 1930s to today.

If we take power, the first thing we would do is solve the problem of Rule by Billionaires. photo billionaires.jpg

We are the ONLY group who would end the rule by billionaires without getting obsessed with it. All the other solutions to the billionaire problem are part and parcel of socialist nonsense that would screw up the economy and almost certainly leave the leftist billionaires in control.

Our billionaire extermination program, like all successful big moves like this,  is a practical step on the road to what we are really after, which is to punish, purely for PREVENTIVE purposes, traitors who have used their success to destroy our kind.

We have no interest in redistribution or economic ideology. So our solution, heavy rewards to those who report what those rich people were doing all these years to our race, right back to the earliest anti-white movement, will not be based on some halfwit economic philosophy.

Audio Bob

24 Comments