B. U. G. S.

I don’t know if it will get past the editors or not, but I just defined anti-racist as anti-white and gave the Mantra as an example in the Urban Dictionary. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=anti-racist keep an eye on it over the next few days so you can vote it up to the best choice.

Adeleim
“It seems most of the anti-whites who are left, argue along the line that it is not genocide because it is not forced.”

What i use is the Lemkin definition mentioned above then say “This is the legal definition used to hang people for the crime of genocide at Nuremberg.”

A follow-up to any objections would be “well that would be up to the judges to decide.”

I think this anti-white attack is great because it provides the opportunity to show the audience the Lemkin definition that was the basis for the law.

(As an aside the openly stated aims of cultural marxism are identical to the Lemkin definition of genocide.)

FairBianca,
It’s tricky when it’s someone supposedly on your own side as you get bogged down trying to be reasonable with them when (imo) the strength of this thinking is it’s use as a verbal weapon. My view is that active people will try it and if it works they’ll use it and inactive people won’t use it so i don’t bother arguing. The only point is if someone has tried it and wants advice on making it work better.

In reality it is forced, directly through the law and indirectly using violent crime as a catspaw.

She’s right that the Mantra stuff is subtly very aggressive so if she’s coming from a feminist direction that will trigger her old thinking but it’s war. Accept it or don’t accept it.

“The new anti-whites might not be entirely new but they seem to be sort of “freedom” anti-white.”

The new libertarian strand is the latest bit of social deconstruction. Easy to turn round: “So you agree with freedom of association including segregation then?” Take their principles and spin it around.

They are annoying though.

Fitzgerald
“I recently got into something that was beginning to look like an argument so i asked horus for his lucky white rabbit foot and he told me to solicit help in here.”

1) As already mentioned above, never defend, always counter-attack.
2) Remember the audience is who matters. You use the person you’re arguing with to teach the audience.

So in the context of the story you linked, they call you a racist, you call them anti-white. When they come back make a point about how when there’s a white criminal and non-white victims then anti-whites like them always make a big thing about the races involved but when it’s white victims and non-white criminals they always scream racism if anyone mentions it. Blatant proof they’re not anti-racist they’re anti-white.

etc

Everyone reading will have seen that happen many times and you score a hit with all of them. Never defend, always counter-attack. Also sometimes when you score a good hit just back off so you don’t spoil it by messing up later on. Don’t answer their questions. Don’t play fair. Attack them.

Kick to kill

(verbally).

Adelheim:
“It seems most of the anti-whites who are left, argue along the line that it is not genocide because it is not forced…

Does anyone have [an] effective response?”

Here’s one I’ve been playing with on OV. I’ve had some good results so far, but it’s early yet. I’ve used it against an aggressive guy who claims to be anti-White but refused to be pinned down on genocide. He didn’t even respond though there were several followups by him.

This “free will” justification the anti-Whites invoke to excuse the actions of those who actually want to see the White race disappear is really one of their weaker arguments. The only reason they keep using it is because we let them get away with it.

It’s a little wordy and could probably be trimmed down a bit. I welcome feedback.

@ Wandrin:

Here’s something I used in my last response to Fair Bianca that’s in line with your Lemkin strategy:

To charge someone with genocide, you must show intent and action calculated to bring about that intent. In a court of law, force, or more technically duress, is not confined to the sorts of threats involving immediate bodily harm that you seem to focus on.

I could add a bit about free will in the text, but the law is more concerned with ACTS of genocide rather than whether or not the victims went of their own volition. At best, the free will argument would be an affirmative defense raised in the pleadings or at trial.

Over in OV, Gator started what’s become a whopper of a thread. (@ Gator: Sorry, I sort of took it over 😉 )
The title is: Is the US military actively promoting race mixing?; and it can be found at:
http://www.stormfront.org/forum/t760620/

Anyway, after about five posts, this self styled WN waded right in with the “free will” excuse:

Originally Posted by klyde53 View Post
Race-mixing is a concious decision made by those who have chosen to indulge. Can’t blame the military,the media, or any other group for this. It’s part of human nature.

Well, I jumped right on him with the following response:

Conscious decision? Is that your justification for excusing people that encourage such behavior for the stated purpose of reducing/displacing/eliminating the White race?

And he would NOT answer that question. He kept evading by saying that he was personally opposed to race-mixing, but he had nothing to say about those who encourage the behavior.

I kept pounding on him for four pages, and I finally got him to claim that he was in favor of stopping it. But then he flamed me, so I’m not sure how genuine his protestation was.

This Klyde is a real character. I call this type the “tough Nazi” as a shorthand. They like to talk about letting the weak Whites die off and they like to use racial slurs. Klyde did both, then acted like I was mental case when I called him on it.

If anyone has the time to review my technique, I would really appreciate the feedback.

On a side note, notice that Anayansi (regulars on OV will know her) doesn’t try to argue with me anymore, even when I address her directly.

I actually consider that to be a badge of honor since she almost stumped me one or two times when I first started with the mantra.

Before I get too heavily invested in a new side project, has anyone had any experience using the mantra in the course of an edit war on Wik1pe6ia?

I posted here earlier that the military promoting race mixing might be a good thread starter. It proved to be so on SF. I think it will work well on other forums as well. Many on SF have a lot to learn, but posting there is still preaching to the choir.

I challenge you to post that thread on FreeRepubic.

“I actually get better challenges on SF than I do in other areas.”

I frequent a lot of left-wing sites and a lot of them go play at places like Stormfront so it’s probably a good place to get practise. My problem with that is i work better when i’m being really aggressive and direct and i have a problem with doing that when someone is claiming to be on our side. As soon as i start trying to be fair and reasonable it all goes wrong 🙂

In the end i think you need to treat people like Fair Bianca the same way you treat an enemy which is to just use what they say to make your own points. Don’t try and persuade them. Try and persuade the audience by using them. I think the best way to persuade genuinely pro-white people to use the same tactics as you is to just use the tactics and let them judge for themself.

If they want to argue about it it’s more likely looking for an excuse to not do anything.

I sense some real fear from this guy about being called out for advocating genocide. He sounds like Bill O’Reily might sound if some called him racist.

ohnny Masters | 1 hr ago | Reply

eritatis wrote:

What you are so gleefully looking foreword to is the genocide of the white race.

position. I do not want genocide of the white race. That would mean I would be taken out. That makes no sense to me. Again, I am NOT for a genocide for white people.

by Lord Nelson on 12/4/2010 – 7:47 am
“Funny how when our established government and media pursue a policy of ethnic displacement against a specific race of people, we are all supposed to believe it’s just a cultural thing. And yet. If you oppose that agenda, they don’t call you a culturalist! They call you a RACIST!! You’re damn right it is racial (not just cultural)

Lord Nelson is right, and his point is very simple. Simple is good because there are fewer words for the message to get lost in.

IF YOU OPPOSE MULTICULTURALISM, THEY DON’T CALL YOU A CULTURALIST, THEY CALL YOU A RACIST. We know this, and what’s more important, the people we argue with know this.

They know it’s about race when we try to defend our culture. Heck, they even TELL us that it’s about race when we try to defend our culture. It’s time for us to make sure Whites take them at their word and assume that when they talk of making our culture take a back seat in our country’s public life, the MEAN that they want our RACE to take a back seat.

This is the same track I was on when I said Multiculturalism MEANS Multiracialism.
http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/2010/06/23/from-scrivener/ Lord Nelson managed to make the point in fewer words than I, however.

I have a major personal failure looming in the near future. If it comes to pass you will likely not hear from me again.

I want to thank every one at BUGS for allowing me to help make a small difference in the world. Keep fighting the good fight.

You never know when you might be able to slip in a little Mantra thought. Check this out

http://m.topix.com/forum/city/wildwood-fl/TDV2FA8F4B07DAJHA#lastPost

“How do we reach other demographics?”

I have a bunch of forums related to hobbies and areas that i have a genuine interest in. I join in the general flow and don’t talk politics unless someone says something first in which case i either back them up or if it’s multicult or anti-whte then i attack. The kommisars swarm and there’s a battle etc. Afterwards i go back to the general flow again.

The forums should be whatever hobbies / interests an individual person has. It could be football, fishing, house prices, anything really.

A video games forum might be a good place to reach someone your boy’s age for example.

@ OldBlighty: Yeah… I’ve been thinking about it, too. Getting traction on a forum like that is tough and actually takes a really large time commitment. I think you might be right in that it could be a more productive use of our time to hit popular places with less active anti-White moderation. YouTube is a good suggestion, I think.

As for the Franklinson/CassandraBellatrix conversation, the dodge I was referring to was the question “who, specifically is doing this genocide.” No matter who is in power, you still have to have a perpetrator for there to be a crime.

I’ve been hit with that question before. The British government was actually helpful enough to go on record recently SAYING that their stated purpose was to displace their native population.

It’s a little tougher in America in that even though the government is doing it, I don’t have a handy example of them saying so. However, we DO have numerous examples of PACs that are on record basically saying that White people have to go and they DO spend a lot of money to influence government policy. Any sane person would admit that this at least warrants an investigation.

I have James. Probably it is just naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews that is being filtered. Try changing it a little. Naziwhowantstokill6millionjews or naz!whowantstokillsixmillionjews. You mayb even use a different word altogether. I sometimes use klansmanwhowantstolynchalltheblacks.

I just listened to a BBC call in show on NPR. The topic was Russia and V Putin. One caller brought up the skinheads and racism in Russia and what would happen when the World Cup came to Russia bringing with it people of different skin colors. Another caller countered by asking:

Have you tried walking around the suburbs of Paris after dark as a White person?

They got him off the line right quick.

A White South Africa – What went wrong

http://boerboel1.wordpress.com/a-white-south-africa-–-what-went-wrong/

This is an essay worth reading. I often point to South Africa as a window into the future of all white people. This essay really shows how.

If anyone ever says that race is just a social construct or skin deep, just look at them with contempt, tell them they are incapable of intelligent discourse and walk away.
http://www.wired.com/politics/law/magazine/16-01/ps_dna

I had an idea for a video but I’ve lost my computer and my economic situation is going to prevent me from getting one in the near future. So I’m going to post a script for a video that I think will suck in some liberals, make them understand what genocide by assimilation is and then beat them over the head with the Mantra.

Keep in mind that I do think I come up with some great ideas, but I’m not a great writer. If anyone wants to run with this feel free to edit or add to it in any way you see fit. Just keep in mind the idea is to have Mommy Professor’s students saying “YES! YES! YES!” through the first half of the video, then show how the same thing is happening to white people. Then hit them over the head with the Mantra.

“Kill the Indian, and Save the Man”

“Kill the Indian, and Save the Man” this was the slogan Richard Henry Pratt used to start the Carlisle Indian Industrial School. Pratt founded the Carlisle Indian Industrial School back in the1870s. His intention was to help the Indians assimilate into white culture. To accomplish this, Indian children were taken from their families and forced to learn about European culture and customs. They were forbidden to speak their native tongues or where their native dress. All this so they could better fit into the white culture that was now dominate on the North American continent.

Pratt and others involved with the Carlislie and other Indian boarding schools believed they were doing a wonderful thing for these Indian children. They were giving the all the benefits of white civilization. They were bringing them out of the Stone Age and helping them to assimilate into white society. Of course today we can plainly see that what they were doing was actually a form of genocide. Pratt may not have realized it but what he was doing was wiping out the Indian identity and as they assimilated and intermarried with non-Indians it wiped them out as a race.

If Pratt alive today he could be brought up on charges of genocide under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide Adopted by Resolution 260 (III) A of the U.N. General Assembly on 9 December 1948. Entry into force: 12 January 1951.
The Contracting Parties,
Having considered the declaration made by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its resolution 96 (I) dated 11 December 1946 that genocide is a crime under international law, contrary to the spirit and aims of the United Nations and condemned by the civilized world,
Recognizing that at all periods of history genocide has inflicted great losses on humanity, and
Being convinced that, in order to liberate mankind from such an odious scourge, international co-operation is required,
Hereby agree as hereinafter provided:
Article I: The Contracting Parties confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and to punish.
Article II: In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
Article III: The following acts shall be punishable:
(a) Genocide;
(b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;
(c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;
(d) Attempt to commit genocide;
(e) Complicity in genocide.
Article IV: Persons committing genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III shall be punished, whether they are constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials or private individuals.
Article V: The Contracting Parties undertake to enact, in accordance with their respective Constitutions, the necessary legislation to give effect to the provisions of the present Convention, and, in particular, to provide effective penalties for persons guilty of genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III.

If rates of intermarriage among Americans continue at the present rate, by the end of this century all that will be left of a once noble people will be some high cheek bones and some feather tattoos. Blood Quantum Laws have already been used by the Bureau of Indian Affairs to declare a number of tribes extinct.

What happened to the American Indians is now happening to people of European decent. Economic conditions have been created so that both parents are required to work and children are sent to school at younger and younger ages. They are forced into integrated schools where they learn multiculturalism and that the white race has been responsible for all the evils of the world. They are encouraged to assimilate or intermarry with non-whites. Now by the 2050 white people will be a minortiy in America. In another 100 years all that will be left of the white races is an occasional pair of blue eyes and good hair. It is genocide.

Everybody says there is this RACE problem. Everybody says this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours into EVERY white country and ONLY into white countries.
The Netherlands and Belgium are just as crowded as Japan or Taiwan, but nobody says Japan or Taiwan will solve this RACE problem by bringing in millions of third worlders and quote assimilating unquote with them.
Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY white country and ONLY white countries to “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites.
What if I said there was this RACE problem and this RACE problem would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were brought into EVERY black country and ONLY into black countries?
How long would it take anyone to realize I’m not talking about a RACE problem. I am talking about the final solution to the BLACK problem?
And how long would it take any sane black man to notice this and what kind of psycho black man wouldn’t object to this?
But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against my race, the white race, Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that I am a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.
They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white.
Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.

LN,
Have you thought of doing a This is England video. Get some shots of what American expect England to be; Beefeaters in fur hats, white kids in school uniforms, white people with umbrellas, old white guy shepherding sheep, the stuff you see on post cards. Then show the slums say this is what jolly old England is becoming. Then do the mantra

Creator,

You are my hero!