Archive for category Politics

Thoughts On Wordism

Robert Whitaker, Philosopher In their book “What Is Philosophy?”, French authors Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari state that “philosophy is the art of forming, inventing, and fabricating concepts.” If this is so, than we can count Bob Whitaker as a philosopher, for he came up with the concept of wordism. Simply put, wordism is loyalty to a set of words. It is contrasted with nationalism, loyalty to a people.

“A person who believes that men should be united according to their nation — their common race and culture — is a nationalist. One who believes that men are only united by words should therefore be called a ‘wordist.’” ~Robert Whitaker

There are also people with no loyalty. We call them sociopaths.

Wordism is Everywhere For any moral question, any conflict, really anything going on in the world, we can understand it better by looking at it through this wordism-nationalism dichotomy. Things previously inexplicable or contradictory start to make sense.

Religious Wordism A god can be tribal or it can be universal. A religion which worships a universal God is a wordist religion. A religion which worships a tribal God is a tribal religion. Here we see the concept of Religious Wordism. In a tribal religion, our God is for us, your god is for you. It wouldn’t make any sense for you to worship our tribal god, unless you were one of the few outsiders let into our tribe. So the only people eligible for membership in this religion are members of the tribe. Most of the time we’re at peace, but from time to time we’ll go to war to see whose god is more powerful.

For a universal religion, however, every warm body on the planet is eligible to be a member. You simply have to BELIEVE (or claim you believe) the right set of words, as interpreted by the acknowledged priest class. Religious leaders of universal religions like Sun Myung Moon encouraged interracial marriage so that the only thing binding the spouses together was the religion. The official policy of the Catholic Church in South America for centuries was “Assimilation” or interbreeding. Universal religions are in constant conflict with anyone who doesn’t believe.

Political Wordism A country or political entity can be based on a a set of words, or it can be based on a people. Those are the ONLY two things a country can be based upon. Thus we have the concept of Political Wordism. In a country based on a people, only those people are eligible to be citizens. Treason is defined as disloyalty to the people. America was founded as a white homeland for “ourselves and our posterity.”

In a country based on a set of words, everyone on the planet is eligible to be a a citizen as long as they BELIEVE the right set of words. Treason is defined as disloyalty to the words. Therefore, a wordist country cannot have free speech because it cannot allow any serious questioning of the words it is based upon. Additionally, it cannot be a real democracy, because what if the people vote for something contrary to the words? We see in Europe, where all countries and the European Union are now all based on a set of Values and Principals -that is, they are based on WORDS, not the people who actually live in those countries- when the people vote in a way the elites dislike, it is characterized as “undemocratic.” Heresy is outlawed as “hate speech.” Every wordist country needs a permanent inquisition to silence any heresy to the words it is based upon.

We see political wordism and religious wordism are quite similar. Since the Religion of Political Correctness is also the de facto established religion of most white countries, that makes them theocracies or religious tyrannies. So is there any reason to make a distinction between political wordism and religious wordism? I think there is. In political wordism, the beliefs are enshrined into law and form the basis of the nation. In religious wordism, the beliefs are those of the group which adheres to the religion. Also, we can imagine a situation where the nation itself is not a wordist nation, but some, most or all of the people follow some form of religious wordism.

The Wordist Mindset The wordist mindset is the attitude that the only thing a person should be or can be loyal to is a set of words. It’s just a matter of WHICH words you are loyal to. They either aren’t even aware of the notion that you can be loyal to a people or they regard any such loyalty as illegitimate if not evil. If we look at the questions Christina Cliff asked us, they all just assumed that you could only be loyal to a set of words. She was trying to find out which words we were loyal to. She asked three times what our “ideology“ was. This is a person who can’t even conceive of being loyal to anything other than a set of words.

The real dichotomy today is not religion vs. atheism or Christianity vs. Islam or globalism vs nationalism. If you step back and look at the big picture, the most basic dichotomy is wordism vs racial nationalism. And wordism and nationalism are incompatible. If you try to combine them, you will eventually run into a contradiction. If there is a conflict between the two, one of them has to come first. You cannot serve two masters.

The Wordist Class The group that makes it’s living by producing words can be looked at as the wordist class. These are the lawyers, professors, politicians, journalists, writers, and bureaucrats that make up our current ruling class. But, just as not everyone in the military thinks they should stage a coup and take power, not everyone in the wordist class is a wordist in the sense that they are not loyal to a set of words, or they do not think the country should be based on a set of words. The members of the wordist class who do promote wordism I call the modern priest class. They are distinct from the priest class of Christianity or any official religion. Calling them a priest class highlights how they are associated with the Religion of Political Correctness and also ties them back to historical priest classes who managed to gain the top position in their civilization’s power structure. These are the people who rule us. They rule through their command of words and their ability to create and disseminate propaganda. They put their propaganda -weaponized terms, talking points and narratives- in textbooks, lectures, news broadcasts, television shows and movies. In it’s more benign form, a wordist might rule through persuasion and rhetoric. In it’s tyrannical form, it rules through moral browbeating and psychological warfare aimed at demoralizing the population. This is the situation we are in today.

“Lawyers, bureaucrats, and academics, these are the people who rule us. All of these people produce only one thing: Words. For those words they expect lots of money and ALL the power. These people constitute a vast and almost unimaginably powerful lobby dedicated to the importance of words over everything else. The only purpose of government, from their point of view, is to give them money and power.” ~Robert Whitaker

Besides white genocide, the great moral issue of our time is reining in this wordist priest class. The warrior class and productive class are reined in by the non-aggression principal which forces them to contribute to the common good. Now it’s time for something like the non-subversion principal. All of these people in the wordist class have vital functions to perform in a harmonious society. Journalists are supposed to keep an eye on politicians, judges, CEO’s, and each other and bring to light abuses of power. Priests are supposed to teach you morality. Lawyers are supposed to help administer justice. Professors are supposed to teach people and teach them how to think. But they’re not doing any of those things. Instead, they’re using their talents to give their class ever more power and money at the expense of society. They are sucking dry all of our moral and social capital.

Now let’s look at wordists themselves. I see two basic types of wordists:

  1. True believers, and
  2. Opportunists -those who support a particular wordism for various reasons but don’t really believe it, for example:
    1. Nationalists posing as wordists to further their racial interests,
    2. Mestizos or brown Muslims marching against “racism”,
    3. People who administer wordism for money or social standing, bureaucrats, imams, journalists, professors.

Not everyone who pushes wordism is a true believer.

Wordists Have to Be Intolerant A nationalist member of Tribe A does not consider a member of Tribe B to be EVIL for not being loyal to tribe A. This is expected. In fact, if a member of tribe B were to announce his first loyalty to Tribe A, that person would be viewed with suspicion. No one trusts a traitor. But a wordist thinks that when everybody on the planet with a pulse BELIEVES his favorite Universal Truth, everything will be perfect. Therefore anyone who doesn’t believe is preventing this utopia from coming about. So they tend to regard heretics as EVIL. The only people who can be tolerant of members not of their group are nationalists.

“Every wordist says that his philosophy will unite all mankind into one huge, loving community. But in the real world, different kinds of wordists are every bit as divided as nationalists are, and infinitely more vicious. Communism is a form of wordism. Communism is supposed to unite all mankind into a single, loving unit. The Communist form of wordism has killed over a hundred million people this century.

“All wordists claim they love everybody and that their words unite everybody.

“Then they proceed to kill real people by the millions, all in the name of their words.

“Every wordist claims that his particular words will unite all mankind. The religious wars that slaughtered millions of Europeans in the sixteenth century were fought between fanatics who believed the words of Protestantism united all men and the fanatics who insisted the words of Catholicism united all men.

“If you represent the Only True Faith, you cannot tolerate the very existence of other opinions.” ~Robert Whitaker

Whether to be a wordist or a nationalist is a choice. But, unlike a nationalist who is born into a tribe, a wordist must choose which wordism to believe and be loyal to. So why would you choose a particular wordism? You would choose it because you think it is better than the thousands of other Universal Truths which have been concocted. A nationalist may or may not think his tribe is better. But a wordist MUST believe his words are better, or he would choose another set of words to believe.

You could counter that people are born into a wordism which has been adopted by society as a whole, and they are inculcated into it’s values from birth and just go along with it. But adopting a particular wordism is still a choice, even if you kick that choice up to a broad societal level. The decision of whether to believe a particular wordism is still an individual choice.

When Wordists Take Over Wordists do their greatest damage when they take the top position in the social hierarchy. India began its slide when the Brahmin class took over the top position in the caste system from the warrior class. When Zoroastrianism was an Aryans only faith, Persia was able to hold its own over the greatest military machine of the time, the Roman Legion. After the priests took over, they were overrun by bands of desert Arab bandits. The last head priest of Zoroastrianism was a mulatto.

This may explain why Christian wordism never caused Europe to brown out. The Christian priest class never took the top position in the social hierarchy in Europe from the aristocracy. However, Christianity did inculcate slave morality in the masses. This set the stage for the modern priest class, the wordist class, to take power first in Russia in 1917 then in America about 1930. The wordists now occupy the top position in the social hierarchy in all of Anglosphere and Western Europe and they are doing their best to brown out all the lands they control while waging a cold war against all the white lands they are not fully in control of yet. There’s a laughable notion that corporations are in power and white genocide is all about profit. Corporations and politicians have to bow down to their leftist masters. Corporations do what’s bad for white people whether it makes them money or not.

Why Talk About Wordism? Basic research is always good. But we see many pro-whites who spend all their time engaging in activities which have no chance of helping to get pro-whites in power. With them, it’s one Outrage of the Day after another which they impotently whine about, one after the other. They never engage in the propaganda war. Just giving a name to a phenomenon begins to give you power over it. We can use wordism in a number of ways to discredit anti-whitism and demolish their belief in their moral superiority:

  1. Wordists claim to be above provincialism, You can point out that, since there are thousands of Universal Truths, they are at least as provincial as nationalists.
  2. Wordists claim to be for peace. You can point out that they have far more blood on their hands than nationalists.
  3. You worry about what we might do to maintain an ethnostate. What about what you do to maintain your wordist state?
  4. We’re obsessed with purity of blood? You’re obsessed with purity of thought.

How can you be loyal to words? Good question! Words can’t be loyal to you. This highlights a basic absurdity of wordism. Loyalty is a moral choice. Maybe believe is a better term. But wordists treat words exactly like nationalists treat their own kind. Maybe they’re just irrational. You could say they’re loyal to their fellow wordists.

Don’t nationalists use words? What about the Constitution? Isn’t that a bunch of words? And all the laws are words. Nationalists use laws. Aren’t you wordists, too? No, because we are not LOYAL to the words. Words are tools. I use a hammer, but I’m not LOYAL to it.

The implications of Bob’s concept of wordism are enormous and many are yet to be worked out. Wordism is one of the tools we can use to crush anti-whitism.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail

10 Comments

The success of the phrase “Anti-White”

The following excerpt was written in March, 2013:

“Anti-white” creates a new category

When the word “anti-white” has been put into the minds and onto the tongues of every White person in this world by constant, determined, unceasing repetition, A NEW CATEGORY WILL EXIST:

ACTIONS AND PERSONS THAT ARE INJURIOUS TO WHITES. 

That category does not exist today. Think how absolutely necessary that category is.

When that excerpt was written, there was no category of ACTIONS AND PERSONS THAT ARE INJURIOUS TO WHITES. Whites and everyone else had been trained to think only of other races as being targets of racial attack.

The absence of any concept of whites being racially targeted was supported by the absence of any name for such targeting. Giving something a name makes it visible and ushers it into the realm of existence.

During the last few years, BUGS has hammered the name “anti-white” into the mainstream. “Anti-white” focuses whites’ understanding of attacks that are made against them because they are white.

Both anti-whitism and White Genocide have been taking place right in front of our faces. But both had no names in the public arena, and so both were going virtually unnoticed, until BUGS yanked the veil off them by hammering their names. 

Those names have now begun to have their effect on the national mind and on the national discourse.

From the late Bob Whitaker and from BUGS, to whites everywhere:

You are welcome!

~~~~

AW

They say they’re anti-racist. What they are is anti-white.

Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white!

Diversity is a code word for White Genocide

 

[Visitors to BUGS may comment to this article here or here]

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail

, , , , , , ,

3 Comments

“It’s okay to be white” and “White self-hatred is SICK!!!”

[This article was originally written for a broader audience at fightwhitegenocide.com and whitegenocideproject.com, where visitors to BUGS may post comments to it]

Hats off to the alt-right for its brilliant meme “It’s okay to be white”! Anti-whites look like fools when they react angrily to it, and the meme rouses hearty cheers from whites* who are sick to death of anti-whites pounding them in a zillion ways that it’s NOT okay to be white. The meme brings whites a small step closer to a restored sanity from which they can turn back White Genocide.

A downside of the meme is that the reason it fits the present moment so well is because it doesn’t step very far outside the present moment’s anti-white conditioning. Whites can believe “it’s okay to be white” while continuing to think it’s also “okay” for their countries to be flooded with third-world races, who of course are also “okay.”

Only a race that has been made sick with self-hate passively allows other races to invade its countries and blend it out of existence. Bob Whitaker’s meme “White self-hatred is SICK!!!” backs up whites’ most important meme of all, White Genocide.

But unlike the immediately accepted meme “It’s okay to be white,” the meme “White self-hatred is SICK!!!” needs to be hammered hammered hammered over and over and over, just like the White Genocide meme itself, before it will be accepted, since asking whites to realize they are sick asks for a bit more than just asking them to feel “okay.”

If pro-whites aren’t willing to do the work of hammering over and over the deeper and more difficult White Genocide meme and the memes that support the White Genocide meme, and instead they rely largely on incremental, immediately acceptable memes that are fun to invent and fun to use but change white consciousness only slightly, because they don’t step very far outside whites’ existing mental conditioning, whites may be long gone from this earth before they are woken up to the program of genocide that anti-whites are carrying out against them. Bob (Whitaker) often told us that when things get too easy, we should check that we haven’t wandered off course. Thirty years from now we don’t want whites to be saying “It’s okay to be white,” we want them to be saying, “We stopped white genocide.”

“It’s okay to be white” gives a still demoralized white population something they can grab ahold of immediately to gain buoyancy in a sea of anti-whitism, which puts those whites a step closer to eventually being rescued from that sea of anti-whitism. And of course any meme that so effectively makes anti-whites who react look like idiots gets an A+ for that alone. The meme works well with “White self-hatred is SICK!!!” in the present moment, and it’s apparently a lot of fun to spread — thanks are due to our alt-right brethren also for their exuberant spirit that buoys us all!

We BUGSers strive for a larger later harvest by shouldering the less gleeful work of sowing the meme “White self-hatred is SICK!!!” and the other “late bloomer” Bob Whitaker memes that back up the White Genocide meme.

Everyone is of course invited to join us. Below are the most important of the memes linked just above. Some of you who are new to these phrasings may feel they are odd at first, but they were very carefully crafted by Bob Whitaker** and will slowly sink into you and into your white audiences, guaranteed:

#WhiteGenocide***

#AntiWhite***

Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white

Diversity is a code word for White Genocide

White self-hatred is SICK!!!

“Diversity” means chasing down the last white person

The Mantra

————————————————————–

* For example, Jimmy Marr, the energetic Northwest activist who has displayed various memes on his truck, is reported to have said that “It’s okay to be white” got by far the most positive comments of the various memes he’s displayed.

** Bob Whitaker, who founded BUGS and recently passed away at the age of 76, was a genius whose varied career included writing memes for Voice of America.

*** “White Genocide” and “AntiWhite” weren’t creations of Bob Whitaker. The phrases had been marginally present in the pro-white world for a good while, but it was Bob who not only realized their potential but was also able to attract a group, the BUGSers, who hammered them into the mainstream where they have their present strong foothold. Keep hammering them!

~~~~

April 1, 2018

Take the Pledge! Tell W. Va. Governor Jim Justice on April 1, 2018, “White self-hatred is SICK!!!

 

Screen Shot 2017-12-23 at 2.03.26 PM

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail

, , , , , , ,

14 Comments

The Nativist Party

By Bob Whitaker
(Bob wrote this some time ago. An idea he had when we left the AFP. )

We the People…. And OUR (Repeat OUR) Descendants

We, meaning Bob and his BUGSERS have discovered that a person who is a candidate for office has some of his first amendment rights. “Common Law,” which I think of as Sensible Law, one who declares himself a candidate IS a candidate. I worked for them, and know that legislators have done all they can to limit what they now look on as “first amendment PRIVILEDGES.”

I know how they think, I did their work for them.

No one knows first-hand the way BUGSERS do that developing successful political strategy is a matter of trying and grabbing whatever seems to work and then working your heart out on that and slowly finding what does work.

So I have found that a few precious first amendment rights can be temporarily recovered by being a candidate for office.

As with gun permits, any is followed by a mountain of additions designed to take that right away.

But the fundamental fact is that being a candidate gives an American back a tiny piece of being a real, old-fashioned CITIZEN! A lot better men than I am DIED for those rights. So I claim them by becoming, as I said before, a permanent candidate.

One thing I discovered in Washington was not only how complicated things are due to Willaim the Bastard’s victory in 1066, but how surprisingly simple some things remain because he was forced to allow most of the Anglo-Saxon Common Law to continue in force.

For example, only under the Common Law could you get a copyright without a lawyer. Believe it or not, if I want to copyright these words, all I have to add at the end is Copyright, Robert W. Whitaker, 2016. There are ways I can lose the copyright, but the point is that, unlike any other country on earth that I am aware of, only in Common Law countries can you have ANY rights without a lawyer.

When we were forming The Populist Forum, we asked our very experienced and of course unpaid press man, Bob Hoy, how we would go about making the “Populist Forum” a real thing.

Hoy shocked us by announcing that, even in Washington, DC, we just announced it. In this case, we just put the name in our first press release. The one “Bob” was to write. All our meetings ended with “that Bob will write,” which assumed that Bob’s work was free of charge.

Which was true.

By now we are all familiar with the massive and onerous limitations law puts on a person who dares to claim the right to run for public office, as if he were the equal of people in office.

Us Wallacites took on the most tyrannical state in the country, Ohio, which had almost unbelievable restrictions on anybody who wanted to claim to be a new political party. It started with a hundred thousands signatures and got worse from there. We got it over turned.

But it never occurs to people they do not just say, in the news, once you declare yourself a party, you ARE a Party, at least in the news and so forth. So I am hereby taking the word that makes conservatives weewee in their diapers and claiming it as my own.

Bob Whitaker is now THE presidential candidate for The Nativist Party.

When courts decides whether a law is legitimate, it does not look to an declaration or at some Statement or Commentary. In a free country, something which can be a matter of law is assigned to the government by the CONSTITUTION.

In all of our history, the purpose of America has been stated and adopted only one time and in only once place. If you proposed it today there would riots on almost every campus. It is totally Nativist. In fact it is the most Nativist statement anyone could come up with. It is one hundred percent “Birther.:”

Here ladies and gentlemen, is America’s ONLY reason for existence:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

National Review says this means America is a Nation of Immigrants!

BUT, BY DEFINITION, a democracy or a republic is ruled BY and FOR its citizens.

Trying to give one’s country to be ruled by outsiders is the DEFINITION of the word “Treason.”

Treason is the most abhorred crime of all.

Dante had nine circles of Hell for punishment. The worst was not hot.. It was cold.

Murderers, thieves, heretics, each group has its own Circle for punishment.

But to my mind the worse crime is giving your fellow citizens’ own country to others.

Our “elitists,” with National Review and other cuckservatives as always, demand treason.

If that sort of brutish beast declared any opposition to treason to be nativism, then I sincerely hope that I am the most totally Nativist person of all.

Cuckservaties are named for cuckoos. Cukoos throw their birdies into a nest of other birds for them to raise it. They trust that the bird-brained who built the nest will allow their own offspring to be fed and raised by the invaders.

Cukoos and cuckservatives assume not only that Americans are birdbrains. They insist that we belong to a particularly inferiors set of birdbrains.

So far they have been right.

Who should be president?

If someone cannot understand the first paragragh of the Constitution, all the PhDs in earth will do him no good. He or she may know all about what happened in Asia last week, but they have no place anywhere near public office.

I am a Nativist to avoid treason. I am candidate in order to recover some of the right of US citizen.

The treasonous mindless elite’s hatred is a high compliment.

I say to all our cuckoos:
“Go to Hell.”
“There’s a place there reserved for you.”

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail

2 Comments

Bob Raw #016 – Using the Divisions and the REAL Campaign

By Bob Whitaker

The big news at the beginning of this campaign was that Trump decided to go out and gather the fundamentalists, the usual prayers in schools, urgent issues like the ten commandments. He is doing what republicans always have done, which is why the country is practically gone now.

He is worried about dividing the country.

If you are going to take over a country politically you have to use the divisions that are there. You don’t sit around trying to act like they’re not there. That’s insane for a group that takes power in the teeth of the establishment.

For them then to turn around and say “they’re trying not to divide people up”, they’re divided dam it! Trump said he was going to build a $15M wall to divide it. So its a little late on that point. Its just so stupid. Its the same old crap.

In our sense the campaign started when Hilary used the term White Genocide. And no body took her seriously. Course we’ve noticed that Hilary could take her clothes off in public and nobody would notice. She’s just ice station Hilary and no one is all that interested in what she has to say.

But this was important because that use of White Genocide, copied straight from us Gang, that’s the actual news, certainly the campaign, we’re talking about campaign news, that’s not news for another stumblebum republican to dribble prayers in schools to another group of clergymen who are supposed to delivery their little whities the way black minsters delivery their blackies.

The second stage of the real campaign, which is what WE are conducting. I hope that gets through to you, we are conducting the REAL campaign.
When that kooky guy talked about all he wanted for Christmas is White Genocide. Now it is a measure of just how seriously Hilary is taken that she spoke as the national candidate and the phrase barely touched the airwaves. I mean they quoted her of course, she cant do anything that they wont quote, but it wasn’t up to the level of a joke. It was that bad.

This professor was taken seriously. The candidate for the national democratic party for president was not. There is a big lesson in that.

For one thing, everybody knows Hilary is not news. She’s the establishment, the elite as they call themselves. And what she says doesn’t make the slightest bit of difference. So when Hilary comes along and says something about White Genocide, she said something about immigration and birthers that I saw, that was quoted, and it just passed under the radar. And in that case its just that nobody cares. She’s such a bore.

So the real campaign is going to develop around our issues. And our issues are in fact dividing America. And people will say “but those are the issues that are dividing America”, well then those are the important issues aren’t they?

But National Review will say “Oh No, No, No, immigration, nobody cares about that, they’re worried about prayers in schools.”

So the real history of the campaign only contains a couple notes. In this case when White Genocide was first used and the contrast to the national figure that used it first and the fact that it got no reaction what so ever. Their own candidate, the left didn’t even pay attention to her.

 

Using the Divisions and the REAL campaign

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail

1 Comment