Archive for category Politics
You who promote important ideas are not replaceable.
But all of the famous people you know about and read about have no importance.
One real irony about Wordism is that those who are well known under any form of Wordism are exactly the same individuals who would be in the same position in any alternative Wordist system.
We all know that the guys doing the beating and torturing with a hammer and sickle on the wall are exactly the same guys who would be doing the beating and torturing if there were a swastika on the wall or a Cross of the Inquisition.
Everyone will agree with that–as usual–that is where the thinking stops.
The excitement stops with the Secret Police, so everyone will be interested in that.
But the fact is that the same people who are in Congress would be the same ones who would be in a Reichstag voting Hitler into power or in the Soviet Congress, holding up their Party badges with the rest.
The Nazis used to say that once they conquered the USSR they should hire Stalin, because he knew what to do to Slavs who disobeyed him.
If you were in charge of an Apartheid America, the man to keep your Black Population in line would be an Obama.
This is why it is so ridiculous for any intelligent person to think that power means that one associates with Important People.
If Important People made any difference to what form of government we have, they would not be so perfectly interchangeable from system to system.
Important People are Important People precisely because they are dedicated to getting this IP position and fame under ANY system.
So it follows that Important People do not have real power.
This is what makes my place in the power structure utterly mysterious to damned near everybody.
While specialists write books about how people became Important, they know nothing about how the System their subjects are Important in actually came to be.
Nor do they need to.
Not a single Sovietologist suffered the least embarrassment that the entire system he had been given millions of dollars to know simply vanished without his noticing it. They did what one does to be a top Sovietologist or any other kind of top Intellectual.
Important People do not matter when it comes to determining the future.
If they did, they wouldn’t have time to be Important.
There was a fairly unknown military strategist in the Pentagon during the 70‘s and 80’s named John Boyd. He is best known for creating the idea of the OODA (Observe-Orient-Decide-Act) loop for military operations, which I suggest reading about if you have the time (1). My point in writing about him here at BUGS relates to something he said that is relevant to the times that are approaching us as pro-White activists. The following bold text was a retelling of a conversation that a junior officer had with John Boyd.
“One day you will come to a fork in the road,” he said. “And you’re going to have to make a decision about which direction you want to go.” He raised his hand and pointed. “If you go that way you can be somebody. You will have to make compromises and you will have to turn your back on your friends. But you will be a member of the club and you will get promoted and you will get good assignments.”
Then Boyd raised his other hand and pointed another direction. “Or you can go that way and you can do something – something for your country and for your Air Force and for yourself. If you decide you want to do something, you may not get promoted and you may not get the good assignments and you certainly will not be a favorite of your superiors. But you won’t have to compromise yourself. You will be true to your friends and to yourself. And your work might make a difference.”
He paused and stared into the officer’s eyes and heart. “To be somebody or to do something.” In life there is often a roll call. That’s when you will have to make a decision. To be or to do. Which way will you go?” (2)
I think that most BUGSters would agree that we want to DO SOMETHING (end the program of White genocide) instead of BEING SOMEBODY.
We’re entering a time when people out of what we loosely call “the movement” are going to start getting opportunities to BE SOMEBODY.
When you see this, please remember something very important. Getting to BE SOMEBODY within the current anti-White system will very likely come at the cost of DOING SOMETHING (such as spreading our message and opposing White genocide). A White Nationalist could be made President of the United States and he/she may be allowed to pass some immigration restriction legislation and put an end to some anti-White affirmative action policies. But if this individual refuses to address White genocide (by force-mixing Whites with non-Whites) then it doesn’t matter if all three branches of the American government are filled so called “White Nationalists.”
The acid test (3) for any supposed pro-White individual or pro-White group is the Mantra.
To be or to do. Which way will you go?
“Do we really have a chance without going public?” (John Locke)
The commenter “John Locke” asked the question above regarding street activism. For some time now I’ve been thinking about this subject so I took his comment as a good opportunity to address it.
One mistake many White activists make is assuming that street activism is necessary for our success. They believe this because they see National Socialist Germany as their model. This is a mistake. The NS of Germany had to spread their message via the street because there was no other way to get a message out when they had no access to the major media sources (newspapers, radio). Today with the internet this isn’t necessary.
Since the beginning of American White Nationalism not one street demonstration/rally has made one bit of difference (in fact, in total they’ve probably had a negative effect). Even the intellectual White Nationalists with their scholarly meetings and 1000 page tomes have had more success at influencing minds compared to the street marchers. The worst elements of White Nationalist Times Past have been the street marchers. When discussing street marchers, some White Nationalists will say “at least they have balls.” It’s important to understand that it’s easy to “have balls” when you have nothing to lose or when you’re paid by the anti-Whites.
Of course, although it’s not really necessary to have street marches, it doesn’t mean it can’t be done. If people wanted to wear BUGS t-shirts with the Mantra printed on the back and clean up a public park or beach, this would be good activism. If someone wanted to hand out mantra flyers while wearing a White Rabbit costume, this too would be good. If someone wanted to walk across America (and say the mantra in the town center of all the towns they pass through) to raise awareness of White genocide (while wearing a BUGS or Follow the White Rabbit t-shirt), this could be an option as well.
The most important aspect to consider with public activism (or any dissemination of a message) is the presentation. Political theater is art. This is where one needs to take an honest look at oneself and determine if one is truly appropriate for representing the pro-White movement. If one is a poor public speaker, or prone to anger and excitability, or is just plain ugly, they should be wise enough to know that they’ll only hurt the cause they claim to advocate for. When it comes to people like this, they should accept that they’re not cut out for this role and find another way to help the cause (spreading the mantra at the SWARM, creating art, website support, financial support, writing articles).
So to answer John Locke’s question regarding street rallies and “going public,” the answer is “NO,” we don’t need to do this to “have a chance.” We just need to disseminate our message in the most attractive and creative way possible. If someone wants to try to disseminate the message using political theater on the street, then go for it. But it has to be done in an attractive and creative way.
With that said, if I were the anti-Whites and I was worried (which they are…trust me) about the message at BUGS spreading out of control, I would create a street activist entity for the purpose of polluting the message. I would populate this entity with buffoons, scumbags, and weirdos and have them go public to push the BUGS message while acting like circus monkeys.
I would then give them media attention so that they become the face of the BUGS message. I would use the SPLC to report on this entity of circus monkeys to frame them as the face of the pro-White consistent message. I would do all I could to try to associate the BUGS message with this unit of circus monkeys.
This is what I’m looking for. The enemy knows it can’t handle our message. So the best thing they can do is try to pollute it and associate it with the buffoons, scumbags, and weirdos of White Nationalist Times Past. Look for the sudden appearance of a street activism entity that starts getting a lot of media exposure.
The anti-Whites have been doing all they can to ignore BUGS, Follow the White Rabbit, and the Mantra. BUGS and Follow the White Rabbit appear nowhere on the SPLC’s or ADL’s website and this is out of fear of advertising our message for us. Of course, they’ll feature big reports on “radical right” entities with 6 people, but won’t dare say a word about BUGS or FTWR.
But they know that they have to DO SOMETHING to try to stop the spread of our message! So the anti-Whites will create this street activism entity (which may also have an internet radio show, YouTube channel, or blog) to pollute our message and associate it with the buffoons, scumbags, and weirdos of White Nationalist Times Past. Remember that the anti-Whites can’t handle a practiced BUGS Adept (they’ll never invite Bob, or the White Rabbit, or Lord Nelson, or Beefcake on a radio show or TV interview). All they can do is use dirty tricks (1). So they’ll create their own BUGSter circus monkey unit that they can handle and present it as the face of our message.
Robert Walker Whitaker and OTHER American Dissidents Appeal to Dmitry Anatolyevich Medvedev for Solidarity Against White Genocide
We are a group of suppressed American dissidents asking Russia to have solidarity with us.
Russia is the only majority white country that does not grovel at the feet of the United States and its European Union.
The question comes up regularly over here: “Is Eastern Europe ready for immigration yet?” It is demanded of every country in Europe and America that it literally change its complexion, that they bring in tens of millions of third world immigrants.
This question is never asked of Japan or Taiwan, but it is demanded of equally crowded European countries like the Netherlands and Belgium.
No one mentions the reason because we all know it: Europe and America are a majority white.
It is an automatic demand made on ONLY white countries. Massive third world immigration and assimilation is a demand made on ALL white countries.
The cry is “Asia for the Asians, Africa for the Africans, and white countries for EVERYBODY!
We dissidents make a declaration of this, called our Mantra, which is blocked as rigidly as any dissident was blocked in the Soviet Union.
We ask Russia to throw this genocidal demand back into the faces of the American and European establishments.
I was in Mississippi many years ago, and stopped at a liquor store.
Mississippi was a dry state.
But as I said, the twenty-first amendment’s blanket declaration that state law is sovereign over Federal law puts terms like “dry state” into the Twilight Zone.
Mississippi law was straight Prohibition. It was officially listed as a dry state.
But who could ENFORCE that law? Mississippi declared that only county authorities could enforce state-wide Prohibition. So if you elected a sheriff who chose not to enforce the law, it could be a very wet county indeed.
Please note that I am not kidding you here.
The only problem with leaving enforcement to the local sheriff was that the state wanted the huge source of revenue represented by the liquor tax.
Once again, I kid you not the slightest: instead of a liquor tax, the state imposed a “Black Market Tax.”
When someone sold something, not specifying what it might be, in violation of state law, but state authorities were prohibited from preventing its sale, a tax must be paid to the state on this Black Market Item, whatever it may be.
And if the tax was not paid, the state could enforce it. There was a Black Market Commission for that.
Today the micro breweries for beer are a big thing. Every one of them is gigantic compared to some of the liquor sellers I saw in Mississippi. One half-pint bottle of clear liquid I found in a store had a white label stuck on it with the words, in ink, “…. Smith, Route 3, Hattiesburg, Mississippi.”
It had the Federal and Black Market Commission stamps on it, and was as legal as Budweiser.
Some counties were dry. Some were as wet as New Orleans. All in a state which officially had no change in its law since the Coolidge Administration.
A doctor acquaintance of mine had a girl friend from New Orleans. She had lived there all her life. One day when she was visiting him in North Carolina they went to a liquor store.
She had never seen a liquor before in her entire life.
In New Orleans you bought liquor off the shelf, the same way you bought Campbell’s Soup, Every Seven-Eleven had liquor on the shelf.
She had trouble with the concept of a liquor store the way you might have a problem with someone taking you to a Mustard Store.
You have heard of a grandfather clause and of “grandfathering” some privilege when it is abolished for younger folks.
The NAACP’s first court victory was in 1915, when the Supreme Court struck down the original ”grandfather clause.”
After Reconstruction, the whole business of championing of blacks became an embarrassment for Northern politicians. In 1908, the Republican demand for black suffrage, which had been in the platform since 1868, was removed.
Southern states, to contravene the fifteenth amendment, made laws that said that a person could vote if his grandfather could vote. Since it was brought to them, the Supreme Court could hardly refuse to face the fact that the only purpose of such a law was to allow only whites to vote.
What is remarkable is not that the NAACP won the case, but how few politicians by 1915 had any interest in blacks.
One major reason Reconstruction ended was because it was so expensive. Military occupation of the South gave all its representatives to the Republicans Party, but the cost, in terms of the government of the time, was backbreaking.
The cost of Reconstruction was so high that even with all the electoral votes of the Southern States Republicans were in danger of losing so much of the North they could lose the national elections.
And, astonishing as it may seem, the moment the last troops pulled out of the South, where ninety percent of the blacks were, political interest the black vote began to fall fast.
By 1940 anyone who looked to history as Inevitable would have seen the future as bleak for the black vote. Its importance had been steadily going down since 1877.
Nothing changes as fast as history. This has become really obvious in our day of carbon dating and the finding that dinosaurs not only had feathers, but WERE birds.
But this fact has only become OBVIOUS even to some Mommy Professors because of recent technology. The fact is that if you gave me a history book I could almost certainly tell you the decade it was written in.
But those who denounce religion the most loudly as superstition are the ones who maintain this superstitious, Marxist faith that there is a Tide of history, an Inevitable History which occupies the exact same space that God does in other religions.
C.S. Lewis was upset at people who were so obsessed with the Future that they used it as an excuse to be cruel today. As Lenin put it, “It does not matter whether the world contains half a billion people or two billion people, so long as that the half billion is Communist.”
One thing that makes C.S. Lewis’ theological ideas seem so logical is his common sense approach to things. He points out that, “The only Historical Inevitably is that today will be succeeded by tomorrow, and there will be a day after that…”
No, I spelled it right.
Leftist strategy is Two Steps Forward, One Step Back. They do not tolerate an opposition which does not give them One Step Back, OSB.
We all know what will happen in 2010:
1) Republicans will lose, in which step they will hurry to compromise;
2) Republicans will break even, in which case they will hurry to compromise “so as not to be a permanent minority;”
3) Republicans will win big, at which case they will show they are “magnanimous and reasonable,“ and compromise.
No matter what happens, the opposition the media allows to exist will give them their One Step Back, half of what they wanted.
In 2008 the Democrats finally elected their kind of President. Kennedy was the last Democratic president from outside the Old Confederacy. Roosevelt was the last non-Southern Democrat to get a majority of the vote.
The reason for this was because the Democratic Convention kept nominating Hubert Humphrey and Massachusetts Democrats and McGoverns the country rejected. Finally the combination of George W’s Vietnam PLUS recession and the threat of “racism” that got Christopher Buckley’s endorsement, they won.
But the bottom line is that America finally got what the Democratic Convention had been trying to sell for two generations.
The Democrats remind me of a dog who keeps bringing dead animals to his master and can’t understand the cool reception they get.
When a hard-core liberal push gets defeated in MASSACHUSETTS, something’s WRONG.
What is wrong is probably the obvious point that Democrats have been blind to for many decades: Americans do not want what they desire.
It’s a classical problem: they’re too far left. Ho-hum.
Actually the Democrats have the same blindness Republicans do. Both were caught with their pants down when Reagan won in 1980 and Gingrich won in 1994. The congress of 1994 promptly began back-peddling to “the votes are in the middle of the road.”
In short, nothing is happening that we are not familiar with. National commentators, right and left, are always taken completely by shock when the obvious happens. They can’t see reality. They get PAID, on BOTH sides, NOT to see reality.
Those who believe in conspiracies have a touching faith in the good sense of those who wind up in power. A guy who can make money must be a genius in all things, so they can’t make all those mistakes without MEANING to.
If you spent as much time as I have near those with money and power, trying to make them see the simplest realities, the whole conspiracy bit makes you laugh. Yes, they ARE that stupid.
The geniuses who rule the left have one thing in common with Mommy Professor: they have the same basic premise as the conspiracy theorists have: that they are enormously intelligent. Mommy Professor is hopeless because he honestly believes he is an idealist and a genius.
One how thinks he is an idealist is immune to any feeling of loyalty or any pangs of conscience. One who thinks he knows all is incapable of learning. This is the picture Mommy Professor has of himself and this is the picture the superrich have of themselves.
They are absolutely incapable of seeing the obvious.
They have no way of LEARNING the obvious because anyone who points it out to them is considered simplistic. A genius has no use for a simplist.
What happened in Massachusetts is that the Democratic Convention FINALLY got what it want. They elected a black McGovern.
Only a conspiracy theorist could make that mysterious.
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.
People asked Ben Franklin what the Constitutional Convention had given them and Ben is supposed to have replied, “A republic, if you can keep it.” There used to be a slogan, “This is a republic, not a democracy, let’s keep it that way.”
Actually, like most conservative statements, this is simply no longer true. The same Supreme Court that made the holy decision to strike down all state laws against interracial marriage which no conservative dares question also decided that the United States is NOT a republic.
The only phrase in the Constitution that gives the Feds the right to interfere with the FORM of state government is the one which requires that all states must maintain “a republican form of government.” Since the outset every state allowed one senator per county, regardless of its size, just as states were allowed equal Senate representation regardless of their population.
This is, in fact, the only part of the Constitution which cannot be changed by amendment.
The Holy Court of Miscegenation ruled that this provision in in all but one (unicameral) state legislature in the fifty states was unconstitutional. The Holy Court ruled that if a state is not a democracy, it is not a republic, so all legislative bodies must be based on population.
Except the Federal one. So the Federal Government is not, and cannot be, a republic.
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.
Since Rousseau, Marx and all the rest wrote the basis of modern Political Correctness, every assumption they made has been destroyed. In fact, just repeating what their concept of human nature was based on is like telling people about bleeding and Galen in medicine.
Two or three centuries ago modern medicine would seem to be a hopeless cause. Since any step forward required a rejection of EVERYTHING medical teaching was based on then.
We are trying to do the same thing in social science, so do not despair.
Rousseau, Marx and Political Correctness are all based on the concepts that “Animals do not fight wars,” “You have never seen an animal ask for another animal’s passport, “The class System is a purely human invention.” and so forth.
We all have seen POPULAR documentaries that make hash of this nonsense.
No, chimps do not ask for passports. They silently patrol their borders together and tear apart any chimp who is caught crossing them.
The animal class system not only gives the upper class absolute power, it often forces all males outside it to be sterile.
War? Watch two sets of meerkats go after each other.
And so forth.
You tend to look at the world from the point of view of the latest buzz. I look at the world from the point of view of the surprisingly many doctors who recognize the germ theory three centuries ago and are now forgotten.
This is a very important distinction. Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis tried to get doctors to wash their hands when they came to deliver babies STRAIGHT FROM THE DISSECTING ROOM. He was so overwhelmed by the number of women and babies dying in agony from the rejection of his deduction that he died insane.
And Semmelweis is the only martyr to such a cause THAT WE KNOW ABOUT.
If I thought the world’s future was as this century’s buzz makes it out, I would probably be giggling to myself in a cell right now.
One age of history does not progress from today’s headlines to The Future.
The overwhelming force in the headlines is inertia. It is inertia from the last great explosion that made the news commentary of the last period of history pointless.
Let’s get specific. The 1920s were a reaction to the enormous movements just before. World War I had destroyed much of the Old Order that had existed since the monarchies of Europe defeated France in 1914. A revolutionary reaction to liquor had gotten a national ban on alcohol. Communism, due to that same war, was on the march leading to what is now called the Red Scare everywhere.
By 1920, everybody was TIRED. It was summed up in the words, “Return to Normalcy.”
Prohibition was here to stay. The policy of war between nations was outlawed. Anti-Communism was national policy. Harding and then Coolidge were elected to get us back to normal in the New Age.
In this New Age there was a Republicans Ascendancy so complete that the Democratic candidate in 1924 was simply ignored.
The New Age lasted exactly one decade. All of the old certainties collapsed in the world wide Depression. Economics was the issue on all minds, trying to get out of that collapse. The New Age of Democratic Ascendancy in America and radical politics abroad had arrived.
Political commentary in the New Age of the 1930s dealt with economic theory and the rising Industrial Class. Each country had its own unique conditions, its own fascist and Communist movements or, in the case of the US and Britain, the lack of them. That was political commentary in the New Age of the 1930s.
That New Age again lasted ten years. World War II blew it away. Everything became the New Order of the post-War.
I could go on, but this is the easiest period for everyone to see each New Age come and go.
In each New Age, or inertial period, practical people are impatient with anyone who does not understand the Inevitable Future. Political Commentators consider themselves and are considered by their readers to be talking about Reality, things as they really ARE. If you are an old magazine fan as I am, these Practical Men look silly.
A Stormfronter started what is now a LONG thread about how there are more and more SUBTLE trolls signing up on SF.
This was my observation:
1) Stormfront is being taken more and more seriously.
2) It is therefore inevitable that professional anti-anti-semites and the like will try to penetrate and influence us.
3) We need vigilant people like J.S. Bach to notice this and warn us about it.
4) As the racial issue becomes central and the fake opposition conservative crap is shoved into the background, our REAL opposition to political correctness comes to the front
5) This was bound to happen as the racial divide became more obvious
6) It is a very very GOOD sign.
Stormfront gets tied down in “news and Jews.” So I might wait a bit before putting the “Coach, not Leader,” there. It maybe a waste of time right now to try to get anything listened to during the Obama News Period.
To some extent my lack of brilliance is made up for by my lack of bullshit, so I admit that seeing a black face in the Oval Office depresses me, though by my own logic it shouldn’t. Logically a white man who has declared his enmity to his own race is a far worse creature.
My Stormfront signature still ends with “Anybody but McCain.” But it takes a while for my heart to catch up with my brain.
Certainly the United States which has established the religion of political correctness is like a US which has been occupied by any other alien. Loyalty to such a system is treason to our real country.
All that is logical, but it is still depressing. So Stormfront people have the right to a period to vent their anger.