From Jensen to BUGS

Posted by Bob on February 27, 2010 at 9:26 am  
Filed Under Coaching Session, Political Correctness, Race Matters | 11 Comments »

People who use the word “liar” freely are never truthful people. So I see it as a big word when I use it. But I have to now.

They fired Dr. Watson, co-Nobel Laureate, for saying that Africa’s problems are a result of low IQ’s.

The Bell Curve was a best-seller when it made that clear beyond dispute. So what have they done? They simply outlawed saying that.

In the 1950s, there was no such thing as schizophrenia. You could only call it The Schizophrenic Response. That was to make it clear that all professionals agreed it was a RESPONSE having nothing to do with human chemistry or, God knows, GENETICS.

All experts agreed on that, hence the term.

Once again, a tiny group began to look at the TESTS. The proof of the pudding was that one treated The Schizophrenic Response only by TALKING a person out of the trauma that caused that Response. But, as with racial IQ, the tests came out wrong. The American Psychiatric Association condemned such testing.

But tests on drugs by the FDA showed that they DID work. A drug company official can go to prison for selling something that comes out wrong in tests. If the psychiatrists then had sold their far more expensive Talk Cure treatments as a drug, they would have gone to prison for selling them.

Now the psychiatrists have made sure that only psychiatrists can prescribe many of those drugs. So they admitted they were wrong. But they never SAY they were wrong. The Schizophrenic Response has gone down the Memory Hole, like racial IQ analysis.

Mommy Professor has stopped trying to deal with testing that leads to heresy and has gone to outright suppression. They do not deal with Dr. Watson the way they did with Dr. Jensen.

Why does information get produced? There is no other way you can understand this new phenomenon. Suddenly the tests have begun to come out RIGHT.

Recently a whole group of tests has come out showing that the Talk Cure works and drugs do not, the way it should have come out in the first place. This is not even logical, since the problem is now universally admitted to be chemical and a diagenetic rather than a response.

The Genome Project always comes out RIGHT. Every testing that is financed is now a Just So Story.

In the past, making up one’s test results before you started risked exposure, even in the vacuum-sealed halls of academe. They’ve learned from that. The exposure of the open frauds by Global Warning advocates is just the surface, the one time they got caught. If they openly cheat on that kind of test, what kind of License to Kill do they have on RACE?

So far nobody but me has pointed out how obvious this is: “to be a forensic pathologist, you have to do two things,

1) deduce the race of a victim from the tiniest rotting remains, and

2) Join all the other Recognized Experts in denying that race exists.”

The era of the Jensens and Rushtons is OVER. The Bell Curve would not be published today. No book or treatise will be published if it contradicts orthodoxy, and certainly no study will be FINANCED if it does not guarantee results ahead of time.

The bottom line is that we will no longer be ALLOWED long explanations. We have watched the Mantra being routinely blacked out everywhere. But we sneak it in. You can’t sneak a TOME in.

We must use short, devastating stuff, like the Mantra or my description of what a forensic pathologist must do. The era of Jensen is passed. The era of BUGS has begun.

WHOSE Objectivity?

Posted by Bob on January 18, 2010 at 1:27 pm  
Filed Under Coaching Session, Political Correctness | 2 Comments »

When someone demands objectivity, always ask, “WHOSE objectivity?” When they are questioned on such matter as their fanaticism for Obama or their unanimous screams against Goldwater they will shrug and say objectivity is not possible in the real world. Then they start declaring that all objective science is agreed on global warning and especially race.

All tyranny is based on objectivity. Ayn Rand said that Freedom is based philosophy of Objectivism. Her followers are as rigid and as mirthless as any Puritan. Cotton Mather, Karl Marx, CS Lewis, Ayn Rand, all of them see spontaneous joy as evil, as an enemy of the grim Objectivity they are trying to promote.

In his Surprised by Joy, Lewis hurried to point out that his Joy was not a happy emotion.

I have written repeatedly that the person who calls everybody a liar in invariably a liar himself, that those who shout Mercy loudest uses it as an excuse for unlimited torture, that the person who scream HATE is always motivated by hatred himself, and that an experienced cop will look twice at anyone who is trying to look TOO innocent.

Mercy is the opposite of mercy, all capitalized virtues are their historical opposites.

Objectivity is the antithesis of freedom in history. And Freedom is the opposite of freedom because Freedom is objective. That is why it is capitalized. Actual freedom exists precisely to the extent that Objective Judgment stops limiting it.

Wordism says Freedom is a matter of WHO limits it. One is Truly Free only if he is obeying he law or the Lord or Marx or Mommy Professor.

And that, brothers and sisters, is ALL that the word freedom means.

Because of what freedom really is, a free person must always regard EVERY form of judgment as an imposition. Tyranny has absolutely nothing to do with the Words which lead to limiting it. BY its very name, society must limit freedom. But one must never look upon one excuse, one form of Wordism, as better than another.

I once called cop in Britain because a loudmouth was sitting on his roof next to my hotel. When the cop showed he ran. The cop told me he couldn’t do anything anyway, because in Britain a man’s home was his castle. I asked him what about he Englishman n his hotel room trying to sleep. One cannot throw rocks from his castle so why can he throw noise?

Nobody ever answers me.

And what about my right to go straighten the guy out myself. That I didn’t bring up before a cop, but it is freedom any Anglo-Saxon would have recognized.

None of my freedoms mattered because the man in front of me had on a costume. He represented Objectivity.

The loudmouth’s freedoms have to be weighed against mine. That is true and it is what people say. But my point here is that, as usual, they say it but they don’t THINK about it.

My point is that the BALANCE is the point, not the JUSTIFICATION. In Rule WW2 I pointed out that the media or a respectable conservative cannot say that shooting someone down for trying to escape a Red country is not the same thing as a right-winger shooting someone down. If that were evil the entire Communist Empire would be evil., OBVIOUSLY evil from the word go.

But this cannot be because the left cannot be evil, just as Jews cannot hate and only whites can be racists.

No human being is objective or perfect in any other way. But the inability to be altogether good is no excuse for evil and the imperfection at being objective is not a license not to be. But Wordists use their Truth as an excuse, whether it is their version of Patriotism or Mommy Professor’s Progressivism or the million different declaration of the Will of the Lord.

Wordism sees no such balance.

Wordism is insane.

The Rousseau Assumption

Posted by Bob on December 4, 2009 at 5:40 am  
Filed Under Coaching Session, Political Correctness | 4 Comments »

The man who did my last interview is a former California professor of Political Science who was born and raised in Croatia, then Yugoslavia. It was a Communist state. But he thought Political Correctness was an American product. I pointed out to him that it is a Marxist term.

My interviewer had the honesty to admit he had not realized that. Nobody seems to realize it but me. He then translated the term he was raised with from the Reds from the Croatian and it was “political rectitude” which is a synonym for political correctness.

That sort of basic observation seems to be my particular gift.

Or curse. Gang, it is actually SCARY when you see so many things that are so obvious and no one else notices them. You get the feeling that you are surrounded by Pod People.

No one talks about real Marxism these days, so no one realizes the wildly obvious fact that regular correspondence between them throughout their history has included the term “political correctness.” This is another case where the REAL theory is so silly that the left does not discuss it and the respectable right obediently doesn’t.

Nowadays when someone says he is a Marxist, he ignores the REAL meaning of the word. He says that means he believes in “the class struggle.” Not only is that not true, it has nothing to do with Marxism. The class struggle to Marxism is exactly like evangelism to Christianity. A Christian is not “one who believes in evangelism.” Christianity claims to believe in the crucifixion, the resurrection, supernatural things.

Evangelism is part of the practice of Christianity, but it has nothing to do with what Christianity IS. Marxism is one of an endless historical progression of Wordist ideas that advocate a class struggle that popped u in every literate society for thousands of years, but that does not define Marxism.

Marxism is about the thousandth recorded system that believes in a class struggle. No society has ever been without some form of THAT as preached by radical. To say Marxism is belief ion “the class struggle” is like defining Pentecostals as “people with feet.”

Marxism is based on Rousseau’s idea that animals and savages have no sense of property, no borders, no pecking order whatsoever. Like every other theory of its time. Marxism says man’s genes demand that we return to the natural order of a classless, borderless society like that of the animals and savages. This is not mentioned today because it is so laughable.

This leaving the Rousseau Assumption alone is not confined to the Marxists or even to the political left. Everybody knows that all of the assumptions on which every theory today is based, the Rousseau Assumption, has been blasted to pieces by discoveries about animal behavior in the last half of the last century, But everybody ignores it and hides in their Book.

What everybody does NOT notice is that social sciences have not changed one iota because of this revolution in knowledge. O’Reilly is as fanatical as any Marxist in denouncing “the idea that one person is just naturally smarter than another.” Hannity, Baby Jesus, insists that if we knew The Book we too would be like the beasts of the field, though he has no idea what the beasts of the field are like.

Everybody still goes on the assumptions from before the finding of facts like chimpanzees hunting and eating monkeys and patrolling their borders with a ruthlessness that would solve the Mexican Border Problem instantly. The class system is so strong in all herd animals that it would startle a Victorian Brit.

But no social theory today, left or right, takes the slightest notice of this. Their Book was written before it came up, so they will nod when it is mentioned, but then go on to what they always said.

Communism’s Cargo Cult

Posted by Bob on November 13, 2009 at 7:00 pm  
Filed Under Coaching Session, Political Correctness | 2 Comments »

I pointed out previously in some detail how Mao’s Great Leap Forward, a crippling disaster, was caused by Mao being Shrewd. Communists insist that running an economy is something Intellectuals can do. They always feel cheated because the capitalists have some secret.

I wish you had all seen a documentary about North Korea. It freezes your gizzard. All the pictures on walls are of The Leader. It takes you a while to understand the old lady is thanking The Leader thinking of an old woman and giving her the apartment.

The documentary is about a doctor who went to North Korea and did a hundred or so simple sty removals on blind people there. All of them, when the bandages were removed and they could see, thanked the Leader. No one mentioned the doctor.

Communism is PRIMITIVE. It is a Cult, like Political Correctness. So is the idea that there is some SECRET, some KEY to capitalist success. Mao decided that all of the Western countries produced STEEL. So he set up a Great Leap Forward dedicated to producing steel.

Meeting the STEEL quota was all that mattered. I don’t need to tell you what the result was. Tiny smelters were attempted everywhere they should have been producing the few instruments required for rice production. As usual, the stuff written down as steel was nothing of the sort. They melted stuff down.

Khrushchev came over to America in the 50s and he found out what the American Secret was: America produced CORN. So Russians, already on the brink of starvation, were ordered to plant American-style corn.

Russia is not America. You can plant maize almost anywhere here and it will grow to some extent. Only a Communist would ORDER it to grow most places north of Crimea.

As I have described, Stalin decided that Communism made people perfect, so genetics didn’t matter. He murdered the whole Medicogenetical Institute and put Lysenko in charge of Soviet genetic. Lysenko decided to make winter wheat by freezing summer wheat for a while, and that was one of his more logical ideas.

Only Communism could make the Breadbasket of Europe starve.

The problem is it is hard for us to abandon the long discourses and big words respectable conservatives use and talk about a Cult. It is hard for us to look at the Harvard faculty that takes Communism seriously and the Jewish Geniuses who have this elaborate scheme that a mere human can barely see the outlines of and laugh at them as a Cargo Cult.

If you don’t know what the Cargo Cult is, please let me know.

But Communists have repeatedly gone the Cargo Cult Route and been worshiped for it.

Kissing liberal hiney makes a living for respectable conservatives but it wont sell, first and foremost because it isn’t TRUE.

Outer Space and Cyberspace

Posted by Bob on November 11, 2009 at 5:13 am  
Filed Under Coaching Session, Musings about Life, Political Correctness | 1 Comment »

As I talked about before, the end of those SST flights at 2.2 times the speed of sound across the ocean marked the first time in aviation history that a faster mode of transportation was abandoned. For emergency communication, the SST is not necessary. We have speed of light communication.

Certainly computer speed will multiply thousands of times in this century. Already successful experiments in wiring computers directly into brains have succeeded on men and monkeys. In fact, there is no good reason why many paraplegics shouldn’t be walking with these direct connections now.

In a few decades, we will be able to transmit not only sound, but taste and feel, at light speed. We will be able to reproduce it. Taste and feel are a combination of a finite number of different sensations. In other words, about everything we LIKE can be reproduced and transmitted in cyberspace straight to our taste centers.

Taste and feeling are broken down into a finite number of parts, like pictures. We have nothing like the computer speed to transmit them now. But will we decide to fulfill our desires by living in space and doing large things, or by satisfying ourselves within the area of our brains?

Both methods would “save the environment” in a way no army of Kyoto-style bureaucrats could do by assigning allowed growth to each country and each industry.

The only real way to save the environment would be to leave it, either for outer space or for cyberspace or a combination. Now we come up against the REAL objectives of the group that yells environmentalism. The day the USSR collapsed, every socialist I knew suddenly became an environmentalist. Mommy Professor and all his kiddies dream of a world ruled by Mommy Professor.

They don’t care whether Mommy Professor rules as Commissar or a Kyoto-style bureaucrat, the idea is as natural as it is absurd. And Mommy Professor does not care a whit more for the deer than he did for the Welfare of the Proletariat. They dream of a world ruled by Marxist Intellectuals or bureaucratic tree-huggers as naturally as an industrialist naturally tends toward price-fixing.

It is just that nobody ever mentions that Mommy Professor, like any other occupation, has a natural bias.

One who balances outer space and cyberspace in real calculations of the future must CARE about the results. Mommy Professor has no interest in any of it. He is against all technology in a fundamental way. He does not want any technological solution to get in the way of a Moscow-based or Kyoto Treaty based dictation by Intellectuals who will provide quotas and philosophical discussions in place of bread and butter.

The one example we have is atomic power, but, like the SST, there will a lot more things happening in this mix. Industrialists always found something wrong with laws against price-fixing, and the Intellectuals will always find reasons why obvious technical solutions are dangerous or immoral.

Self-Hatred

Posted by Bob on November 10, 2009 at 5:57 am  
Filed Under Coaching Session, Political Correctness | 3 Comments »

For almost two millennia, Western Society made an ideal of someone who whipped himself bloody each night, who starved himself, and who, above all, was totally sterile.

Now we sit around and shake our heads in wonder and ask how white self-hatred has become our highest ideal.

Hey, stupid, IT ALWAYS WAS!

I have pointed to the roots in Buddhism and decaying Zoroastrianism, but will we sit around and make up stories about Conspiracies by Aliens.

My simple explanation that we are the race with the least adaptation to environment and therefore we are the race that took the ideal ground is rather obvious once it is stated. People want whites because they look better. Whites look better because we concentrated on competition among ourselves, including blond hair and blue eyes.

People adapted to frozen places have Oriental epicanthic eye folds. People who adapt to hot or cold do NOT have white skin. But I still hear the old “Challenge of the Frozen North” crap.

In fact, the reason historians tried so hard to put Zoroaster in the sixth century, BC — I just head that on a documentary but even mainline historians dismissed it a long time ago — is because Israel only became monotheistic in the seventh century BC. There could not be a whole Persian Empire that was monotheistic long before.

That’s why the philistines — Persian-oriented philosophers — were denounced. In early days there was constant power struggle in Israel between those who favored the current Egyptian dynasty and those who favored the ruling power in Mesopotamia. Israel/Judah was just a buffer state. Studying that history alone is exactly like studying Belgium with no reference to Germany or France or the Netherlands or Spain.

No wonder the only non-Jew praised by the Old Testament was Cyrus of Persia. And it was almost certainly in the never-bemoaned Persian Captivity that monotheism came to Israel.

So was is this history avoided? It demonstrates the one fact that both anti-whites and Conspiracies want to deny: Our fate is our making. No other race can have that much influence over the only creative race that exists.

The only creative race that exists.

The only creative race that exists.

Other groups did not create our self-destructive disease. There is not one word in the Old Testament or even in the New Testament before Paul about how sterility was an idea. And Paul was a Pharisee. He was a sophisticate of his time, which meant that he was steeped in the knowledge of his time that included heavy doses of degenerate Zoroastrianism.

Everything connects. People roll their eyes when I talk about Z but talk endlessly about Jewish history. They totally misinterpret transmigration of souls as if it were a GOOD thing or a RELIGIOUS thing. It is the Wheel of Life, which ancient Aryan philosophy teaches ESCAPE from.

So our self-hatred is HELPED by enemies, but, like everything else, it comes from US.

As I said before, every piece of Oriental Wisdom turns out to be an old Aryan fad that got frozen into the Oriental motionlessness. Kung Fu was a religion in itself. The Way of its day. That’s why the Orientals still have religion we have long since forgotten, along with Communism, which will ALWAYS be in China, just as will Buddhism, which scarcely exists in India.

Each thing above presents a new world view from that we now have. And we have a different diagnosis of our disease.

All Power to the Intellectuals!

Posted by Bob on October 22, 2009 at 4:15 pm  
Filed Under Coaching Session, Political Correctness | 6 Comments »

In 1992 I decided to try grad school again. One semester almost drove me nuts but I learned that what I had said about academe in A Plague on Both Your Houses in 1976 was, at the very least, true. In 1976 it had been many years since I had left academe and my description of it struck even me as a bit overblown.

I found out in 1992 that it wasn’t. But I had no illusions going in. One person, hearing I was in Political Science, said, “It must be fascinating to them to ask you about all your campaigns and making laws and working for the President.”

I was actually stunned by this statement. Obviously it had been a LONG time since this person had been in school, or maybe, like most people, she just didn’t notice while she was there. I sort of mumbled, “No, they’re too busy to be interested in that stuff.”

In school, your sole interest is in listening and regurgitating on tests and trying not to worry yourself into a breakdown. The person who asked me that had a college degree, but probably had not been to grad school. She probably thought that GRAD students would be interested in the subject they were dedicating their lives to. I understand that was once true.

My father used to advise us to talk to a professor about HIS subject, because to HIM that was the most fascinating thing in the world. Back in HIS day it was probably true. After all, back then the few people who had doctorates could make good money anywhere. But by my time academe or government were the only places a man could be assured of a job for life.

Graduate students and professors have less interest in their subjects than a plumber does in pipes.

One thing I noticed was the difference, even from my generation, in the reaction of professors and grad students to the words, “If you’re so smart, why ain’t you RICH?”

In my day, professors or grads would just chuckle at it. Today they start to explain how just anybody can get rich if they’re MEAN or GREEDY enough or how it’s all a matter of chance and so forth.

They protested too much and they protested WAY too quickly.

There are endless books about how industrialists shape their mentality around the industry on which their money and power depends. But I am the ONLY person who has written a book of that sort about academe.

Academe is an industry so gargantuan that it could stuff US Steel in its vest pocket without a bulge. On every issue its attitude is that if things were turned over to the Intellectuals, things would be fine. All money would be OK if the Intellectuals took it and gave it out.

This giving all money to the dictatorship of the proletariat, made up of Intellectuals, used to be called Communism or Socialism. On the day the Soviet Empire collapsed, every Communist or Socialist became, in a single day, Environmentalists. No one else noticed that, of course. If they had noticed it they would have been surprised.

I wasn’t. The program of Environmentalism today is a Kyoto Treaty where all production becomes subject to the dictates of the Intellectuals.

PC: Give US the Money!

Posted by Bob on October 17, 2009 at 6:32 am  
Filed Under Coaching Session, Political Correctness | 4 Comments »

It is not entirely accurate to call Politically Correct economic theory socialist. Socialism is a theory of production. PC has no theory of production whatsoever. Politically Correct economics is one hundred percent distribution. All that PC has to say on the subject is, “The intellectuals will collect and all the money and distribute it.”

Don’t confuse this with an economic theory. Political Correctness says that “the Intellectuals should run everything.” Economics is just a part of everything.

PC believes that money comes from magic. In this they are exactly like libertarians and liberal churchmen. The official Catholic statement on economic begins on exactly the same basis that other church statements on the subject do, “THE LAND PRODUCES great wealth. I short every church begins its statements on income distribution with what Screwtape called, “a good, sound, resounding lie.”

The land produces little or nothing. Hunters and gatherers had “the land” all to themselves, and about twenty thousand of them scratched an existence out of the entire British Isles. More to the point, if “the land” produced all that the same churches would not be demanding that first world countries send enough to survive on to third world countries, which contain a lot more of “the land.”

Every church today, in this as in other areas, is not only a liar, but a psychopathic liar. But even a psychopath has a reason for lying. Ion this case they are following the Politically Correct line: There is no production, only distribution. No church EVER discusses why one system is more productive than another. No church would EVER imagine criticizing a Great Oriental Philosopher for talking about table manners while children collapsed from starvation within a mile of him.

All anyone discusses is distribution. You can hear a fat preacher bemoaning starvation, but you will never hear one mention that this is the first time in history when starvation is an unusual way to die.

Once again, what I am saying here is too obvious to be noticed. This is the only place you will see this point even MENTIONED.

Cold Eye Nausea

Posted by Bob on October 13, 2009 at 6:44 am  
Filed Under Coaching Session, Political Correctness, Politics | 4 Comments »

What is the difference between a cultural outlook and a prejudice?

There is none. Not only is there no difference, but only the most nauseatingly ignorant person thinks there is.

I made my living for decades operating among highly intelligent, ruthless people who wanted my blood. That is an experience that makes you instantaneously boil things down to basics. It doesn’t take long for you to stop noticing whether the person you are talking to uses big words or has an accent; all you learn to notice is whether he is buying what you say or not, whether what he is saying is drivel or not.

So almost everything that impresses other people completely disappears for you. In such a raw fight for power, you not only ignore people’s pretenses, at some level you don’t even notice them at all. Let me give you a shocking example of this.

Have you ever been standing in a line at a supermarket and seen a charming baby on in a crib? Us older folks do. But instead of grabbing at the child, a mature person looks it in the eyes and grins and maybe says some words. Very often this is delightful to the infant, and they grin and kick and blow bubbles.

Have you ever seen a respectable conservative when a liberal praises him for being “cultural” instead of “prejudiced.” It takes a very experienced, cold, professional eye to see how exactly a Buckley reacts the reaction of that baby being smiled at by an adult.

A Buckley, senior or the departed senior, does his own version of grinning and kicking and bubbling at the mouth. So does every respectable conservative. You see, the liberals who call the shots have the same frigid professional eye that I do. This reaction to liberal praise is the sine qua non of being given the absolutely essential credentials of being labeled a “respectable” conservative by media liberals.

So a Buckley will bubble and grin and kick in an entirely different way. Me will not be wearing a diaper, but an expensive suit as approved in New York and New England. He will raise his eyebrows in the way he would expect one of his gods, an Ivy League WASP or a Jewish Intellectual, would expect him to.

Where the baby goes “Goo!” the Buckley will use big words.

But to a really cold, professional eye, all this is superficial. In fact, you learn very quickly it is fatal to let these superficial differences impress you at all.

This very hard-learned ability to see right through the superficialities becomes automatic, and it is absolutely essential if you are to be hired and trusted at high levels. People with power and money don’t hire people who don’t have this Cold Eye.

But, in all honesty, this Cold Eye has certain drawbacks you don’t see until you have been through the mill and developed that Cold Eye.

Once again, I am not being cynical, but dead honest: One of the things that comes with this Cold Eye is nausea.

In my seemingly endless list of life experiences, I once worked in a retarded home. My stomach is churning right now as I try to write this down. No matter how hardened you are, that room full of grown men in diapers, the few extreme retards who make it to beard-growing age, makes your stomach turn. They are smiling, every one of them, delighted to see you. You CAN’T hate them.

But I will never forget that one of the most extreme bleeding-hearts I even knew saw them and said, Bob, I never thought it would be possible that I would ever agree with the Nazis about euthanasia in any case, but God help me, I would do it to these people.”

Now you get an idea why the Cold Eye carries with it a threat of nausea.

It is critical to understand that there is not a bit of cynicism in what I am saying. It is a REAL problem for me. With my combined experienced and the Cold Eye I could not help developing, watching a respectable conservative react to a liberal telling him he Cultural and not Prejudiced is literally nauseating. I can’t help it and I certainly don’t LIKE it.

You see, a Buckley or a Hannity or a respectable conservative Southerner looks at an establishment liberal exactly the same way that baby ion the supermarket looks at me. Hannity and Buckley and a Southern apologizer have EXACTLY the same attitude to Ivy Leaguers and Jewish Intellectuals that that baby has to me. To Buckley, who is not tainted in his own mind with a Southern family but is also Catholic and IRISH, of all things, the true Yankee or the true Jewish Intellectual is the True Adult, the True Final Judge.

This was true of Buckley, it is far more true of somebody down the line like Hannity. Buckley senior must have pointed out a thousand times that he was born in NEW YORK. He and his family never allowed anyone to call their background without answering, ANGLO-Irish.”

To someone with my Cold Eye, these inferiority complexes stand out like a black man at a Nuremburg Rally.

Too often, this reaction to respectable grin and bubbles at any liberal praise really reminds me of those smiling men in the diapers, and I anteing cynical and it IS a problem for me.

An Individual Point of View

Posted by Bob on October 9, 2009 at 7:34 am  
Filed Under Coaching Session, History, Political Correctness | 3 Comments »

One reason I see things clearly is because I see them from what Aleksander Solzhenitsyn in the Gulag Archipelago called “an individual point of view.” Few readers and no intellectuals understood what he meant by this.

Up until his time in the Gulag, Solzhenitsyn adhered to the established religion of his country, Marxism-Leninism. He thought Stalin was a thug and said so, which is what got him into the Gulag. But he considered Lenin the greatest man in history and it was his life’s work to write the definitive biography of that Saint.

What Solzhenitsyn meant by an “individual point of view” was what he later became: a Russian, not a Marxist. He saw himself as an individual with a, repeat A, meaning ONE, personal point of view: “an individual point of view.” Only then was he able to observe THE REST of the world accurately.

If you are part of the established religion, regardless of what that institution may be, you are not a part of the world or the people you are analyzing. You look down on others in the light of your own Final Truth.

Everybody is a provincial, but you cannot understand anything about real people unless you face the fact that you are a hick, too. The people who cannot understand reality at all are those who THINK the INSTITUTION they are part of does not have a “point of view.”

Those who have an institutional view analyze everything as a step up or down toward their Final Truth. They are the most extreme form of provincial. They possess a hickdom no real hick could even imagine.

And, unlike a normal hick, the institutional hick cannot imagine that he IS a provincial.

PC Hypnosis

Posted by Bob on October 4, 2009 at 12:01 pm  
Filed Under Coaching Session, Mantra, Political Correctness | 3 Comments »

At least half of the environmental disasters today are NOT the result of greed. They come from environmental Idealism. This is recorded but never MENTIONED in an endless string of documentaries.

How many times have you seen a documentary saying that some animal has gotten out of hand, and it was originally imported to take care of some other imbalance? But the documentary makers do not NOTICE this. They NEVER say, “…ONCE AGAIN this animal which has gone out of control was introduced to take care of an environmental problem is creating a far worse one.”

The usual explanation for this is that it is a Conspiracy. The Learned Elders of Zion call each other up, “We won’t say AGAIN.” The Conspiracy idea is plausible to those who feel that people in high places MUST KNOW how stupid they are being. If you get on the inside you realize that nobody gets to the top inside the system unless they think like everybody else I the system does.

ALL established religions select those who are hypnotically repetitious and those who are talented psychopaths, who are able to fake being hypnotically repetitious.

One example stands out in my mind, but you would have had to be there to be as impressed as I was.

My cover was a tourist trip across a Communist border roughly forty years ago. Among the tourists was a real hippie couple. They had on their hippie uniform, beads and such. I wondered how people who carried the Viet Cong flag in parades and lauded Communists would react to what the few tourists too poor to afford planes always saw:
The dug out area or wall, the men with automatic weapons, the skull and crossbones signs that are the international sign of land mines, and the warnings that anyone who tries to escape the Workers’ Paradise will be shot on sight.

I wondered what their reaction would be.

There wasn’t one.

Both hippies went into TRANCE. A REAL trance. They looked straight ahead. They did not SEE the ditch, the land mine warnings, the machine guns.

If you had been there you would be as intrigued as I was: They didn’t SEE it!

The reason the endless cycle of environmental disasters caused by environmentalists is not mentioned in documentaries is because the documentary makers genuinely do not SEE them.

Successful documentary makers have no odor of heresy on them. An established religion can identify someone who is not a True Thinker without even noticing it. There are millions of competing faiths battling to become The Established Religion. The ONE that wins out develops the ability to weed out potential heresy.

EVERY established religion has always required this form of hypnosis in the people who, after all, are merely parts of its mechanism.

This is why using the Mantra is such a useful introduction to reality.

When you use the Mantra, they don’t HEAR you. They go into that TRANCE.

And as an introduction to reality, you need to see that TRANCE in action.

Give ‘Em That New Time Religion

Posted by Bob on October 2, 2009 at 2:23 pm  
Filed Under Coaching Session, History, Political Correctness | 2 Comments »

People in historic times did not live in the same universe we do. In fact, most of them did not live in the UNIVERSE.

This is a concept Lawrence Brown developed in his 1963 book “The Might of the West.” I read it at least once a year and each time I feel a hunger for more. This is REAL history, this is trying to look at the world from the point of the people who lived it, rather than our present “It all leads to Marx and social progress” theme of Political Correctness.

Today historians all write as if everybody in history was just trying to reach our present state of Enlightenment. Every established religion looks at the world this way. The old shaman and the old priest and the “new” Politically Correct professor have the same attitude, “All history has been a search for the Truth, it was searching for the Truth I, at long last, preach.”

It is as old as the hills and the same thing will be fashionable, in another form, when the hills wear down to flatlands.

Race Mixing is UGLY

Posted by Bob on September 29, 2009 at 7:34 am  
Filed Under Coaching Session, Political Correctness | 3 Comments »

Michael Moore demonstrates that Mommy Professor loves ugliness for its own sake.

I do not like looking at ugly people. Why is it that someone so horribly ugly is so popular with Mommy Professor’s products? A good looking person could say the same thing.

Yes, it is very popular for people to say that looks don’t matter. In fact, if you want to hear sincere expressions of that belief go to a high-end beauty parlor and listen to Mommy Professors’ upper income liberals talk to each other. As they sit there spending thousands of dollars on touch-ups and blonding they will recite The Party Line that Looks Don’t Matter.

Vanishingly few people in a high-end beauty parlor are buying contact lenses that make their eyes look brown. Even fewer are having anything darkened. But they sit there and tell each other that children don’t care if their blond mother makes them brown and kinky.

If they have feelings, maybe the kids have feelings too. Well, if they are RACIST feelings that will keep a black guy who likes blond from getting what he wants the kids have no right to those feelings. They are there to get blonded and to talk about how to help the black guy end blondness.

So any discussion of looks is “superficial.” Meanwhile looks are the first concern of damned near everybody, especially their own.

“Do unto others as you would have others do to unto you.”

“Have the COURAGE to Support Comrade Stalin”

Posted by Bob on September 7, 2009 at 9:29 am  
Filed Under Coaching Session, History, Political Correctness | 7 Comments »

During the Stalin Era, there was a public meeting in a small city in Russia. One speech ended on the usual note of how all the wonderful that had been accomplished were “under the Leadership of Comrade Stalin.”

The usual standing ovation occurred.

Stalin was a couple of thousand miles away, but when the ovation had gone on for even longer than usual, no one dared sit down. The realization dawned on the thousand or so attendees that the Secret Police were there, as they were everywhere, and the first person to sit down would be arrested in the morning. So the standing ovation went on and on and on and on and on and on…

And, yes, the first couple of people who sat down DID get arrested in the morning.

If you know anything about the Stalin Era, you get the same laugh I do out of one of the slogans they used, “Have the courage to support Comrade Stalin.” That is like telling a sheep “Have the COURAGE not to get eaten by a lion.”

But we have exactly the same thing today. If you hear that someone “has the COURAGE to SPEAK OUT” you know very well which side they are taking.

No one who openly fights for white survival “has the courage to speak out.” Only anti-whites are ever described as “having the courage to speak out.”

In fact, this is one sure sign of a despotic society. It used to be the height of courage in America for someone to say, “I do not agree with your opinion, but I will fight to the death for your right to express it.” You don’t hear that since the WWII Generation learned that Goodspeak is the only way to go.

The media only praised McCain for Courage when he agreed with them on policy. No one in authority today does anything but denounce anyone who disagrees with The Party Line.

In totalitarian environments the only “spontaneous demonstrations” are those that have been prepared by professionals for reasons everybody can predict. In America, there are no exceptions to day at all.

Final Appeal

Posted by Bob on August 31, 2009 at 3:10 pm  
Filed Under Coaching Session, Law and Order, Political Correctness | 2 Comments »

The World War 2 Generation came back from their how-to-be a good doggy training with the conviction that they were AMERICANS ONLY. There was no white, there was no black, there were no Southerners and no Northerners. As to self-interest, there was only Sacrifice.

That is precisely the kind of Wordist attitude that the Constitution could not operate in. The Constitution uses a system of checks and balances where personal preferences are allowed because the different branches of government will keep each other in check. The final appeal was to the people.

But when the WWII Generation took power, there was no “people.” They were all Americans. The people did not have any existence except as Good AMERICANS. So they had to appeal to a Federal Branch to tell them what Good Americans were.

Whereas the Tenth Amendment made it specific that the final appeal would be to the people or the states, Good Americans do not see any separate entities of this kind.

So the World War II Generation’s Final Appeal is to the Federal Courts.

PC Can’t Keep Its Excuses Straight

Posted by Bob on August 27, 2009 at 1:34 pm  
Filed Under Coaching Session, How Things Work, Political Correctness | 4 Comments »

There is a rule that anyone who makes a living off of history or social commentary has to provide his tithe to our established religion of PC. BBC documentaries end with a sermon in which everything that has been said is jammed into the PC world review.

When I see that this particular book is the one in which the author pays his tithe, I close it and return it. Each author must give excuses for minority behavior. In one case a historical fiction writer was declaring that the Gypsies were regular exploited WORKERS just like everybody else, like illegal aliens in America.

Meanwhile Piers was explaining that Gypsies stole babies and other property because they did not recognize property rights. So presumably if Gypsies were appearing in your town and you gabbed one of THEIR kids, they would think nothing of it.

So Gypsies are hard workers for their due wage and don’t recognize there is such a thing as a due wage.

Blacks don’t commit more crimes — or one would be justified in suspecting them of crime more than people with white skin — and every writer must know the list of reasons WHY blacks have a RIGHT to commit more crime.

Democrats spend hundreds of millions getting out the minority vote, but if you say non-whites are likely to vote Democratic in the wrong context, you are a Nazi.

One Sentence Racial Truth

Posted by Bob on August 25, 2009 at 1:43 pm  
Filed Under Coaching Session, Political Correctness | 6 Comments »

The History Channel is advertising a program with the words “All humans are 99.9% identical.” They are also 99.5% identical in other articles, equally Politically Correct.

Bill Clinton said 99.99%, and he wouldn’t lie.

This is the latest One Sentence Truth about race. Fifty years ago, I read in a COMIC BOOK that “scientists have proven that all races are equal in inherited abilities.” The illustration showed an Oriental, a white and a black breaking the tape in a FOOT RACE at the same moment. Now that we have SEEN other races in action the idea that all races run at the same speed would get you institutionalized.

But the One Sentence Truth changes from month to month:

All races have equal innate IQ.

Race is a myth.

Race is a social construct.

All races are 99.9999% identical.

All of which means the white race should disappear.

Please note that the History Channels One Sentence Truth says that ALL PEOPLE are 99.9% identical. This means geniuses, idiots, dwarfs, giants, ugly and beautiful, healthy and congenitally doomed to die as children.

If you think about it’s not a very comforting thought. But nobody ever THINKS about One Sentence Truth. You can get arrested for doing that.

Stagnation is Guiltist, Wordist Nonsense

Posted by Bob on August 24, 2009 at 11:02 am  
Filed Under Coaching Session, Political Correctness | 6 Comments »

Sherwood Forest is gone. All the giant forests of Medieval England are either gone or are midget versions of their former selves. What saved the forests was coal and oil.

If we had not progressed beyond the use of wood for every new industry every tree would have been sacrificed. That is what happened on Easter Island, what became the Sahara Desert, in Central America and in thousands of other places.

In other words, as usual, the Guilt People have it dead wrong. We all took it for granted that a stagnant world destroys itself. As you run out of one resource like wood or oil you develop new ones. But this is not done by stagnation in a world planned for stagnation by some Wordist priest.

The environmentalist establishment today is exactly like the priests who said masses to stop the Plague. We cannot deal with any of the crises they make their living on by shouting out guilt about technology and breeding Ethiopian children. The last people in the world who could deal with global warming are Ethiopians.

The Dead World of Guilt

Posted by Bob on August 23, 2009 at 3:23 pm  
Filed Under Coaching Session, Political Correctness | No Comments »

Dave’s article below shows the fundamental difference between life-thinking and death thinking. On the one side there stands the Guilty Man, whose only aim is to be sterile and miserable. On the other hand is the man who demands human beauty, fecundity, and a march to the stars and beyond.

It is hard to believe that a generation ago we were talking about space colonization and comparing the economic growth rates of country. Today all the talk is about how we can make up for our sins by going back to the stone age. Our ideal today is the non-carbon producing, Ethiopian, almost the only group on earth who are actually managing to STARVE.

Our ideal today is the man who “lives with nature,” which is code for being an animal himself. There is absolutely no difference between the loving praise heaped on stagnant stone-age men today and that heaped on animals.

This was called socialism, now it is called environmentalism, but it used to be called Christianity.

There were two versions of the story of Faust. One was the Medieval on in which Faust wanted more knowledge and sold his soul for it. It ends with him torn to pieces and his soul screaming in Hell.

Goethe’s Faust has Faust bound for Hell after his search for knowledge and one moment’s happiness, two things that Medieval “Christianity” hated. At the last moment the angels come and chorus, “A man who tries his best, him can we save:”

“Der der strebend sich bemueht, den koennen wir erloesen.”

In other words a German saw Faust’s desperate pursuit of happiness and of knowledge to be good, the opposite of damnable.

The Mantra goes with a general attitude of good, of humanness. Its opponents is at best Medieval and fundamentally stone age.

Race mixing looks ugly and has bad results. These are the two things the Guilty Man loves. As Dave says, the Guilty Man Mantra is Sacrifice. It is giving your neighbors and future generations permanent sterility and changelessness. It is evil.

Anti-White is Anti-Life

Posted by Bob on August 22, 2009 at 9:19 am  
Filed Under Coaching Session, Mantra, Political Correctness | 5 Comments »

A columnist for National Review, of all places, is worried to death about the demographic collapse of Europe. In the last issue, he noted that a mainline British scientific group had made it official: it recommended that Europeans have NO children. The column writer said it was astonishing that official sources were now stating the inevitable logic they had been moving toward for so long. Sterility is now official policy.

The Zero Population Growth of the 1970s, of which Soylent Green was a symptom, is now Zero Population. That specific report pointed out that an Ethiopian child would produce less than one half percent of the carbon emissions that a first world child would. Third worlders, said the report, should be left to produce the children.

Like the Mantra, this is a matter of something becoming so obvious writers cannot help but write about it. Like the Mantra, respectable conservatives will do anything to dance around the actual basis of these all-too-obvious facts, these elephants in the living room.

The obvious fact is that in order to remove the white man’s consciousness of race which ruled in the 1930s, social engineering had to declare total war. Total war means incidental destruction. In a seventy-year campaign to get white men to cheer when a pygmy marries a beautiful blond, the whole of his nature had to be attacked. The whole business of producing children is based on a prejudice deep in our animal soul: the desire to procreate and perpetuate our own kind.

The whole desire to procreate our own kind is now a Hitlerite obsession, not a natural drive. Conservative Catholics loved the attack on this his instinct when it just said that one should ignore reproducing one’s own kind and consider all marriages holy if a pedophile in a dress the right words in a dead language. But you can’t attack anything this basic drive without turning off the drive to produce one’s own kind without striking at the basis of life itself.

The Selective Melting Pot

Posted by Bob on August 11, 2009 at 4:08 pm  
Filed Under Coaching Session, Law and Order, Political Correctness | 5 Comments »

In the America of respectable conservatives, the term “undocumented worker” is perfectly accurate. In a paper country, why should one person be allowed to work on one side of the border and another not? To respectable conservatives, there is nothing racial or inherited or even cultural about Americans. To conservatives, being an America is entirely a matter of paperwork.

Why should one Julio get five times the wages of another Julio because he has papers?

When the Immigration and Naturalization Acts were passed in 1921 and 1923, it was decided that America was made up of a certain people, and immigration would keep that identity. Calling something illegal immigration made sense, since those laws followed a racial and cultural policy.

But for a melting pot, where the choice of citizens is openly random, no one can really take the word “illegal” seriously. In terms of American policy today, nothing about you matters except the papers.

The documents.

The term “undocumented worker” should be “undocumented citizen.” A bumper sticker ought to say, “I’m not a citizen, I’m just documented.”

Our borders are collapsing because we have declared they no longer make any sense.

A melting pot cannot be selective.

Political Correctness Versus Reality

Posted by Bob on August 6, 2009 at 5:40 pm  
Filed Under Coaching Session, Mantra, Political Correctness | 6 Comments »

When I was coming up, “modern” meant industrial. One writer said, “It is as modern as Marx, as up-to-date as the Webbs.” Fifty years later, I have to explain that the latter were the upper class founders of the old British Labor Party.

Back then, the whole world was going to live in the middle of big cities because that was where the jobs would be. People would live where they work.

In fact, millions of blacks and PRs went downtown as workers moved to the suburbs to get welfare. In the next New Age, people moved to where they could NOT WORK most profitably. When the suburban and inner city trends became “inevitable,” of course, THAT pattern broke down.

As a religion, Political Correctness has to have its own Inevitable Future, its good god called “Change” or “Progress” and its Hell and Devils residing in “reaction” or racism. Political Correctness is derived from our other religions, so this follows naturally. The problem is that other religions were able to make promises in the afterlife. You believe, you pay for the church, you obey rules set, and you avoid Hell. But Hell is always put off into the unprovable period after you are dead, where no one can PROVE it one way or another.

The Western conflict between science and religion was absolutely unique in history. No other society had produced a science separate from its established religion. Even then, had the church stuck to its doctrine of punishment or reward after death. there would have been no conflict. But the church claimed Genesis as scientific truth. One thing the church had to be taught, over and over, was not to stick its doctrines in areas where they are subject to proof or disproof or they would be chopped off with a lot of pain to the church.

Evangelical Christianity was growing by leaps and bounds when it, unlike the Modern churches, kept its serious religion for the afterlife. Now that it is pushing anti-evolution and a fertilized egg should be allowed to vote, its growth has stopped in the first world.

Marxism and its product Political Correctness put EVERYTHING into this world. It is based on the Inevitables of History, and every inevitable Marx and his followers came up with has turned out, over and over and over and over, to be sillier than the Church versus Galileo.

You can’t see this if you look for complications. Like Genesis, the failures of Marxism are with where you START not where you finish. Stalin used Lysenko to declare that, since Marxism will remake the world entirely by planning the world, the laws of genetics did not apply. The result for Soviet agriculture were what those who did not share the Communist religion would have expected. You can’t make summer wheat into winter wheat by freezing it.

As with the Mantra, Political Correctness deals with SIMPLY insanity for a while by complicating it: “You are just being simplistic by labeling Comrade Lysenko’s doctrines that way,” and then, like the Catholic Church with Galileo, just never mentioning it again.

The process is the same as any other church. First you bring forward your Authorities. A lot of people go to huge pain and face oppression to overthrow the Doctrine. Then it denies that Political Correctness said such a thing. Anyone who brings up Lysenko or Galileo is being “simplistic” and “insulting.”

Established religion is allowed to make the same mistake over and over because no one reminds them of the earlier ones. Respectable conservatives have made an industry of forgetting that Marxism is just SILLY. Making a tame opposition part of the establishment. It was a coalition of Sadducees and Philistines and so forth who crucified Jesus.

Our job is not a new one. It is the old one that those who valued truth over the establishment has always had. It now and ever shall be as long as Authority is used against reality.

Professor Genocide

Posted by Brian on August 3, 2009 at 11:52 am  
Filed Under Mantra, Political Correctness | 9 Comments »

In Bob’s last book, he wanted one thing from college students and that was to start giving their professors a hard time.

I have an English composition professor straight out of the murky bowels of California, and to call this woman anything less than fanatically PC would be the understatement of the century. Lately she has been using her bully pulpit to make comments disparaging of those who don’t fall in line with her PC group think.

The past week we were reading pieces of literature with the theme of race. On our final piece we assembled into groups of five and lazily mulled over the material. About twenty or so minutes wasted we discuss what conclusions our group has come to. This time she made a comment saying that there won’t be world peace until everyone hurries up and intermixes.

I piped up and told her that was genocide. She tried to backstep out of that by saying that by saying genocide is a violent. I countered by quoting article 2 sections C and D of the ’48 conventions on genocide.

The other two white males in the class became her fiercest defenders. We went though many points and the following are the most memorable; Rome fell because it turned inwards, cultures need outside influences to survive, the founders designed the constitution so it could be modified to include everyone, the propositional state, that EVERYONE who was inside a colony was included in “for ourselves and our posterity,” race is a social construct, and finally what are white people anyway?

The professor looking frustrated tried to end the conversation but, I refused to give it up. However, when she stood before the class and admitted that she was for genocide, I stared at her slack jawed and allowed class to move on.

While I felt as if I had failed since I had gone off the genocide point, the greatest achievement was having the professor admit to supporting genocide. Go forth chaps and give academia the trouncing they deserve!

Wordism Essay

Posted by Brian on August 3, 2009 at 12:01 am  
Filed Under Political Correctness, Politics | 1 Comment »

The following is an essay that I submitted in my English Composition class. It is my sincerest hope that you will enjoy reading it as much as I did writing it.

The Affects of Organized Religion on American Society:
A Perspective of Loyalty

There are two types of loyalty that one can subscribe to; loyalty to the book, wordism, or loyalty to kin.  Wordism is Universalist; they claim to have the words to unite mankind.  Wordist loyalty is divided into millions of factions, each proclaiming that they and they alone have the proper set of words.  A Marxist can be just as wordist as an extreme muslim who is just as wordist as the televangelist, who says to the poor folks in Appalachia, Jesus wants you to adopt a starving colored boy, AMEN!
 
Organized Religion is one arm of wordism.  The members have devoted their loyalty to what is contained in the book or the official decrees from the lords.  These decrees and interpretations have a way of changing.  An interpretation one way, may change tomorrow and what was righteous, holy, and morally sound yesterday, may as well be the fecal material of Lucifer today.  However these sudden changes in loyalty are dangerous to anyone who is in the business of loyalty, because said wordists will justify their stabbing of you in the back with some obscure misinterpreted passage in their book.

When these states were united in confederation, there existed anti-miscegenation laws on the books of every state.   While the anti-miscegenation case of Loving V. Virginia, 1967 was before the supreme court, the churches took the time to say to the congregation “that it matters not what color they are but as long as they are members of the faith.”  It doesn’t matter what the kid is going to look like or how he feels, all that matters is that the parents were “in love” and united by the right words.  The Supreme Court called the anti-miscegenation laws “unconstitutional.” This display of wordism supported judicial activism and paved the groundwork for the now infamous case called Roe V. Wade, 1973 and they wonder just WHERE the court attained such a power!  Suddenly, because it crossed THEIR book, judicial activism was Lucifer’s poop.

In the 1980’s when in vitro fertilization was a hot topic, the professional Pro-Lifers argued that it should be banned because it destroyed a few embryos in the process.  They claimed that the life of the embryo was as precious as a human’s and that it was morally wrong and damming its soul to hell because it would die unbaptized, and that it was irresponsible when you could adopt a starving colored boy.  However it was the infertile woman’s duty to keep trying and losing the fertilized embryos by natural means.  The difference?  It was the lab.  Today there are over one-hundred-thousand people alive in the US due to in vitro fertilization.   All of which were wanted, which cannot be said about random birth.

Today the issue is embryonic stem cells.  They say the same things they said about in vitro.  However, the parity of life between a blob of cells and a human who is suffering always goes to the suffering human.  They insist that every moment of human life is infinitely precious.  They care not that you actually live with any quality of life, but that your heart beats.  These people are hardly Pro-Life, they are pro-heart thump!  This is what their wordism requires of them at the moment.

When wordism claims to unite society in a Universalist doctrine, it brings few if any positives to society. Wordism destroys freedom of speech and thought, for at the moment you disagree with what the book of the wordists says, you don’t just disagree, you are a HERETIC, and Heretics were traditionally punished with execution.

Taking Credit and Power Strategy

Posted by Bob on July 30, 2009 at 5:12 pm  
Filed Under Coaching Session, Political Correctness, Politics | 2 Comments »

Everyone has a problem seeing why A Plague on Both Your Houses was such a radical book in 1976. Almost everything that hit people between the eyes back then is a matter of routine discourse in politics today. Jeffrey Hart, an English professor at Dartmouth, talked about he books, “coruscating insights.” But those roiling new insights strikes one today as basic logic in politics.

It is actually impossible for anyone today to put himself back in a time when the only recognized “lobbies” in America were big business and defense spending. These were the bugbears of the liberal media. Back then, it was staggering for anyone to talk about the National Education Association as lobby, even though all its money was appropriated by governments. “Lobby” or “pressure groups” were dirty words, applied only to those who used it for Evil Purposes. You cannot put yourself back in those days, when to mention liberal pressure for government money in the same breath with the “military-industrial complex” was not only heresy, but the kind of heresy no one had actually discussed before.

For the first time ever, conservatives at the national conventions were actually discussing what a large proportion of Democratic delegates were NEA members.

In the House, the Republican head of staff made a bet with his Democratic opposite — was it Chris Matthews that far back? — that the budgets for Health Education and Welfare than the Defense budget.

Of course it was. But that had never occurred to either side. Only the Defense budget was discussed. We’re talking about the two staffers who had most to do with formulating the budgets. For the rest of the world the whole thing was unheard-of. And that was just one of the coruscating ideas in there that seem so logical today. By 1980 the whole picture of politics came from what FILTERED DOWN from that little book.

I put filtered down in caps for a reason. I was the intellectual leader on the populist side, which sounds like a contradiction in terms. William Rusher, publisher of National Review, was the leader on the respectable conservative side. We were setting up the 1980 coalition. combining working class conservatives, then called “Wallace voters” with the regular conservative base.

But there was one insight which did NOT go public. This was my undeniable assertion, not discussed before, that the Federal Courts are the last bastion of passing establishment. Bill Rusher gave me full credit for this insight in his history of the conservative movement, but nobody took it up.

The point itself is obvious. One of John last acts as the last Federalist Party president in 1801 was to appoint John Marshall Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Marshall was Chief Justice after the Federalist Party died out completely. But her was a thorn in the side of Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, and Jackson before he died in 1834.

In 1857 the Supreme Court made the totally pro-slavery Dred Scot Decision, because it had been appointed by Democrats when Southerners dominated that Party. By 1938 Roosevelt had his famous “Court-packing” scheme, his first major political loss, because the Court was still full of Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover appointees. And in 1976 the Judiciary was, with the cooperation of respectable conservatives, solidly liberal. I cannot imagine how anyone with a general knowledge of American history wasn’t aware of this phenomenon.

It just hadn’t been MENTIONED specifically.

And it has STAYED unmentioned. Bill Rusher, all unknowing, cut its throat.

The reason is critical, and the reason is this: My “coruscating insights” in Plague were in a small book read largely by a small group of insiders. If you were to trace the movement of those ideas to the mainstream, you would see that they were reworded and discussed by an astoundingly wide range of people. left, middle and right, each of whom TOOK CREDIT for them. But when Rusher attributed an idea in a major book to ME. he cut this process off.

Anyone who wanted to reword it and take credit for the Federal Courts as the routine last hold on power of the passing establishment would have been told by someone on the staff, “Oh, you mean Whitaker’s idea. Rusher discussed that.” Nothing is more discouraging to people who make their living getting credit for new ideas than being told it is old hat, yesterday’s news.

This matter of credit taking is not new. Ben Franklin discussed it as a way to promote things in his autobiography. Once YOU take credit you take it out of the taking-credit market before it gets to a Major Spokesman, you kill it, unless you NEED the credit, as a professor or a Major Spokesman does.

I was after POWER, not credit. Credit is what you give to Major Spokesmen to carry on your concept.

So I want it to be THE Mantra, not BOB’S Mantra. I want to write about Wordism unless Buchanan or some other Major Spokesman takes it on. IT is not likely to be Buchanan, but it is a concept just too perfect for everybody to avoid it very long.

You notice that every time we hit them with the Mantra, including Buchanan’s pages, by the time the link is mentioned in Comments it has been removed. That is not so great a problem, because it is obviously a group effort. For now, THAT IS FINE. It is just inside our branch of the political spectrum, just the few writes we are aiming to HEAR it, that it is recognized. It will one day be taken up by someone in the middle or the left.

I am giving you information on how to proceed in a whole field of power politics no one has really even talked about since Ben Franklin. But in an information society, this is the essence of real power politics.

Next Page →

Switch to our mobile site