Search? Click Here
Did you know you can visit to the swarm with www.bugsswarm.com?
Post on the internet Working Thread

Debate advice and style first 909 posts

Home Forums BUGS SWARM Debate advice and style first 909 posts

Tagged: 

  • This topic has 0 replies, 77 voices, and was last updated 4 years ago by Anonymous.
Viewing 20 posts - 481 through 500 (of 911 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #14364
    Peter Whiterabbit
    Participant

    Seeker, overall well done. I would never respond to the Adam comment but insist that they respond to your point. Ask questions and don’t let up until they respond. You could have used more ridicule…”so you are telling us that the founding fathers who did not allow non-whites to become citizens felt that America should one day become brown??? What are they teaching you kids in grade school these days?”

    #14366
    Richard
    Participant

    Pillars of White Genocide

    Help me think of any other “pillars of White Genocide” besides those I have here:

    Demand of the acceptance and support of:

    1. Non-White immigration and assimilation into White homelands.
    2. All forms of non-heterosexual sexuality
    3. Abortion on demand
    4. Non-marrying Feminism

    Some people who may not have an issue with non-White immigration may wake up when they see how it is usually pushed by the very same people that push these other genocidal demands.

    #14378
    Peter Whiterabbit
    Participant

    @Richard, the pillar of white genocide is assimilation. If immigration suddenly stops, there are enough non-whites in white nations to ensure assimilation alone will blend us out of existence. Immigration is a pillar but assimilation might be considered the foundation. Homosexuality, abortion and feminism are not healthy in white societies IMO but are certainly not pillars of genocide.

    #14382
    Henry Davenport
    Participant

    I like Peter’s,

    ”so you are telling us that the founding fathers who did not allow non-whites to become citizens felt that America should one day become brown???”

    I’d also use,

    “Do you consider Mexicians and Somalis to be the posterity of George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas jefferson, etc.?

    Or did your anti-White professors teach you that words can mean whatever White Genocide requires them to mean?”

    #14383
    Henry Davenport
    Participant

    Let’s not attach our message to homosexuality, abortion and feminism (well, I guess unless you’re posting someplace where views are universally opposed to those)…let’s follow the practical sense of politicians who avoid divisive issues. We don’t want to scatter the minds of our audience all over the place! We want their ears and minds focused on “Anti-White,” “White Genocide,” and “anti-racist is a code word for anti-White.”

    (Richard, are you new? If so, welcome to Bugs!! :))

    Generally you won’t have to mount much argument about genocide, as you’ll pick up from other bugsters, who may even give you some examples here shortly, how to turn queries back to the mantra.

    And Peter’s correct remarks shouldn’t be misconstrued to mean that we emphasize assimilation but not immigration…the Mantra makes a big deal of both. They work together.

    Separation is what creates diversity (separate sub-species) and maintains diversity, and ending separation is what ends diversity, by interbreeding separate subspecies out of existence.

    The separation between human subspecies in this country has been ended not only by increasing the physical presence of non-whites here by “immigration,” and also by having constantly repeated the r-word until it’s become the automatic reflex of most whites at any attempts to maintain social separation.

    So you’ll see lines in various posted versions of the Mantra reading something like, “But EVERY White country and ONLY White countries are being flooded with non Whites who will blend us out of existence.”

    #14412
    meawhiterabbit
    Participant

    Non-white anti-whites. Do you guys treat them as a normal anti-white or point out they are non-White? This one is actually mixed race. Seriously persistent anti-White though.

    #14415
    Secret Squirrel
    Participant

    meawhiterabbit
    If he is mixed race, it is in his ethnic interest, there be a mixed future, in all White countries. He is not loyal to White people, he is loyal to his own kind, which is mixed race people.

    See what mixed race Obama does, regarding immigration in America. He sues any state that tries to stop illegal immigration. Again Obama is mixed race and it is in his ethnic interest, to make America non-White.

    If the anti-White is White, he does not value his own Whiteness, which is fine by me. The problem arises, when he insists Whites that do value their Whiteness, also lose their identity and be forcibly integrated with non-Whites. Creating conditions that will destroy identifiable groups, against their will, is GeNOcide.

    We have a right to a continued existence. The anti-White, no matter what his race, will not accept that. They are all guilty of GeNOcide.

    Direct him to this video and ban him, if he become a nuisance.

    White Genocide – explained
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1L3D-pRv_sc

    #14418
    Richard
    Participant

    Thanks for the replies. I see your points.

    I am not completely new. I have been searching on Stormfront for years as erichard, and decided that the Mantra message is what is needed. I do what I can do with my time restraints.

    People I am related to can obviously see that homosexuality and abortion and non-marrying feminism among whites will reduce the number of whites. They agree these things need to be opposed by whites. But they are dense when it comes to what should be even more obvious: immigration and assimilation of non-whites.

    So by putting them together I hope they will realize their religious leaders are missing the boat in not opposing immigration and assimilation. They all contribute to white decline. I agree it may not matter so much to everyone to mention them together.

    Notice that the “Montana Human Rights Nutwork” (as April calls it) pushes not just for immigration but for the other things I mention. http://www.mhrn.org/issues.html

    #14422
    Henry Davenport
    Participant

    @ Richard: I’m not following you. All the left organizations I ever heard of support abortion, feminism and gay rights…I don’t see what importance that has to our own task. We have a single message, White Genocide. By constant repetition, we attempt to load that term and the term “anti-White” with the same automatic depth of feeling that the r-word has been loaded with by the anti-Whites.

    Abortion, feminism, homosexuality are themselves topics that are loaded. When we introduce loaded topics other than our own, that diverts energies from our message to the other topics.

    As for pro-Whites with strong feelings about abortion, feminism, and homosexuality, we’d like to see their strong feelings focus more on White Genocide.

    As Bob said in a coaching session not too long ago, we don’t talk about all the things other people talk about. Our message is the White Genocide program of the anti-Whites!

    #14424
    Richard
    Participant

    @Harumphty I agree with what you say. I avoid discussions of these other matters. The fact that these other things are pushed by the same people that push immigration and assimilation is my point. Pointing that out may help certain people. Do you not follow that?

    #14428
    Henry Davenport
    Participant

    @ Richard: I just reread carefully your two recent posts on this thread, and your profile. This sentence seems the one that’s principally guiding you (?):

    “Some people who may not have an issue with non-White immigration may wake up when they see how it is usually pushed by the very same people that push these other genocidal demands.”

    Since you are possibly posting in a sub-culture where unanimous views on those three topics are part of the sub-cultural zeitgeist, possibly you are in a special situation that I can’t see clearly.

    Still, I think my points would have relevance for your situation, and I’d also add a caveat that applies to just about all of us but especially to those of us who are new (as I am also): We have spent many years before coming here deepening our feelings about many other topics that are generally important to pro-whites. In contrast, the time we’ve spent since coming here deepening our feeling about White Genocide has not yet, for many of us, made that feeling seep into every cell of our bodies as deeply as our feelings about those other issues have. This makes it hard for us to USE those other issues to support our message, because our old feelings leap at the opportunity to once again beat the drum for the issues we spent so many years feeling so strongly about! And so the issues show up in our posts loaded with the charge they have for us, and detract from our message! The old issues use us, instead of our using them! Best to avoid them IMO…even if we transcend our own charge on those issues, our readers will not have, and will be distracted. IMO.

    #14429
    Henry Davenport
    Participant

    @ Richard: I wrote my last post before reading your short one that precedes it.

    Yes, “Pointing that out may help certain people”…I certainly can see that that could be true! I offer my last post as cautions to keep in mind based on a self-awareness of one’s own attachments to those other issues.

    Best wishes for success where you’re posting!

    #14438
    meawhiterabbit
    Participant

    OldBlighty-Good advice. You are right.

    #14442
    TheSeeker OfTruth
    Participant

    This guy has gone crazy. It is the same one with which I have been exchanging.
    Anti-White;
    The Seeker of Truth December 17, 2011 at 2:50AM

    “Thank you for helping me show these good people how much you HATE White babies.”

    I hate no person, so you’re incorrect with your mis-statement above, aren’t you The Seeker of Truth?

    The WORLD Almanac reported the total White population of the United States for the year 2008, was only 198 942,726, that would indicate more than 102 MILLION people in the United States are Non-White, wouldn’t it The Seeker of Truth?
    Anti-White;
    The Seeker of Truth December 17, 2011 at 2:50AM

    “Tell me sice we are all descendants of Adam, What Black country would you support flooding with non-Blacks and DEMAND that they accept and mix-in until those Blacks no loger exist?”

    With what you call “White” people making up only about 10% of the total population of the World, it would be impossible to find enough “White” people to flood any of those Countries with White people, as there are more than 6 BILLION people on the face of the Earth, with only about 600 Million of those people being “White”, you need to learn more about the population of the World don’t you The Seeker of Truth?
    Me;
    You are right, White people are only 10% of the world’s population. That is my point. White people are the ONLY people in the entire world that are demanded to become minorities in their own countries. White children are the ONLY children in the world that are DEMANDED to ‘blend’, ‘mix’ and breed theirselves out of existance. This is geNOcide! Anti-racist is a codeword for anti-White!
    After this he/she started using profanity and he/she has started being flagged! Score one for the good guys!

    #14443
    TheSeeker OfTruth
    Participant

    Here is another exchange same idiot, same site.
    AntiWhite in response to America being a White country;
    The Seeker of Truth December 16, 2011 at 6:08PM

    “The US was created solely by White people.

    With your “illogic” Logic, this nation was created solely by White men, what are you going to do with all of the White Women, who weren’t even allowed to vote until the 19th Amendment was adopted August 26, 1920, are you going to exclude them from being American Ciitzens, as you propose to do with those you HATE The Seeker of Truth?
    Me in response to stupidity;
    The original United States Naturalization Law of March 26, 1790 (1 Stat. 103) provided the first rules to be followed by the United States in the granting of national citizenship. This law limited naturalization to immigrants who were “free white persons” of “good moral character”. It thus left out indentured servants, slaves, free blacks, and later Asians. While women were included in the act, the right of citizenship did “not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States….” Citizenship was inherited exclusively through the father. This was the only statute that ever purported to grant the status of natural born citizen.[1][2]
    This act was written by the very people that wrote the constitution and founded the country. One would think that they would have the greatest knowledge of what they meant when they said ‘ourselves and our Posterity.’ That is if one knew any REAL history. Yet you seek to twist words and jump hoops to justify your agenda of a world without White people. You are a genocidal maniac RELTIH, but you think that is okay because you are ‘anti-racist’ and your targets are White babies. Anti-racist IS a codeword for anti-White.

    #14489
    Mark Muses
    Participant

    Call the White ones “weak”.

    I’m still crap at true Mantra skills but I do consider myself pretty good at abuse:

    “Too late. The day is nearly over. Just like your propaganda – too late.
    Everyone can see the obvious truth that White countries and ONLY White countries are told they must be blended out of existence – it’s genocide, White Genocide.

    You call yourself White? Oh dear, you are the lowest of the low anti-White. You didn’t even stop to think that your race might have been scapegoated. You just turned on your own people. Weak man.”

    I want to draw your attention to “Weak man”. I think this is something of note.

    WE are “White and normal”
    WE are “virile” (okay, work with me here, the ladies like it)
    THEY are “weak” (when talking about White anti-Whites specifically)

    I’ll confess something. Years ago a work colleague who regularly got all the office girls and later turned out to be a BNP member told me at the bar when I asked why he didn’t like me, “Because you are weak”. That’s all he said.

    I should add I used to be a wet-multi-racial-we’re-all-the-same-twat back then – consciously at any rate. Anyway, what man wants to be told he is weak? I have not forgotten it. I hope this guy I just stamped on doesn’t forget either. It might do him some good – in time.

    #14490
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    A stumbling block that used to give me trouble is a favorite of certain anti-Whites and is similar to their “race doesn’t exist” line, though a little more difficult to address concisely if you aren’t used to dealing with it in BUGS style.

    You’ll be making a point about a specific example (“Mexicans routinely call for the death of the White majority” or “Israeli Jews practice segregation”), but instead of answering your question, they’ll say something like “Mexican/Jew isn’t a race” or “Jews are White.”

    Now, you need to remember that if someone says something in response that you have to think about, if you can’t come up with a short answer in a very short time, just get back on point (the Mantra) and continue. You’ll kill yourself if you stop to explain why what they just said is wrong.

    However, if you can make a short convincing statement that they ARE wrong AND move back to the mantra, you’ll handily win the point with the audience.

    In the case of my example, the response is simple:

    Anti-White says: “Mexicans/Jews aren’t a race.”

    You say: “Cute, but if I say anything you don’t like about Mexicans/Jews/etc that you don’t like, you call me a “racist,” so clearly YOU think they’re a different race than I am.” (Then get back on whatever mantra point you were making.)

    Anti-White says: “Jews are White” or “Jews aren’t a race.”

    You say: “Except that YOU call me an anti-Semite (a RACIAL term) if I say anything about Jews that you don’t like.” (Then get back on whatever mantra point you were making.)

    You can, of course, play around with these to more suit them to your own needs. I just wanted to get the germ of this idea posted.

    #14511
    -Gar5-
    Participant

    Anti-White: they why did whites bring slaves and allow all these immigrants to come here if being white was so important to you guys.why did you all bring the asians to cali to bulid the rail roads.why do you hire illegal immigrants.why did the whites before you bring us here if we are inferior

    Me: The Black dictators in Africa starve the Black people.

    But nobody says the Black people wanted this.

    The Chinese communists limit their population’s children.

    But nobody says the Chinese people wanted this.

    So why is it, when anti-Whites do anti-White things; I, and every other White person has to take responsibility for it?

    I didn’t do it so why is it I have to be genocided for it?? Take it up with whoever wronged you.

    ########

    I’d like Bugsters opinions on this. How to improve it?

    #14514
    Henry Davenport
    Participant

    @ Gar5: Your reply has truth in it. Here’s another idea, using the fact that the Mantra presents two components of White Genocide, the flooding of White countries with non-Whites, and the insistence that Whites “’assimilate,’ i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites”:
    ———-

    Unlike now, there was no program of White Genocide being waged.

    Anti-Whites didn’t control the media, the schools, the churches, and the government, and teach Whites that they must assimilate and intermarry with those non-White groups or they were naziswhowanttokillsixmillionjews.

    Anti-Whites didn’t yet have the power to enforce White Genocide with law.

    Law didn’t require White children to mingle with non-white children and be taught to marry them.

    Anti-racist is a code word for anti-White.

    #14518
    Henry Davenport
    Participant

    In my preceding post, I added the word “Intermarry” after noting that Bob includes the word in the Mantra, although more skillfully than I could here.

    But I think it’s good to be bold and include it! (Am I right that we don’t very often include it?)

    Because if it’s attacked, we can respond with the bugster ploy I love so much, “What anti-White would ever say that Whites shouldn’t marry non-whites as much as Whites marry Whites?” (god, I love that ploy! I haven’t used it yet, so if my rendering can use improvement, please do!)

Viewing 20 posts - 481 through 500 (of 911 total)
  • The topic ‘Debate advice and style first 909 posts’ is closed to new replies.

Comments are closed.