Search? Click Here
New to BUGS? Read Me
Join the BUGS Team by posting with us in the Working Thread


Written By Bob Whitaker – April 20th, 2009


January 1, 2000

Before we discuss what will happen in the twenty-first century, it would be useful to talk about what didn’t happen in the twentieth. In 1976, I began my first book with the following words:

“Our most trusted ‘inevitables’ are collapsing around our ears today. We used to hear that integration would make mankind one, inevitably. It was said that socialism was the most efficient economic system, and would be universally adopted. Bigger, more interfering government was not long ago an inevitable. The United Nations was to lead on a rocky but inevitable road to a united world. Rehabilitation, not punishment, would end crime.”

“Public confidence in these certainties has collapsed.”

Socialism, Thomas Dewey’s New Education, the criminals-as-victims theory, all these things have been obvious disasters.

As you can see, if we had entered the millennium forty years ago, trendy media opinion would have listed a number of things that would “inevitably” develop in the coming decades. Now we are reduced to one.

Today all the “inevitables” are gone but one. That is the inevitable “solution to the race problem” by immigration and integration. This “race problem” exists only in white majority countries.

A white country is said to have a race problem if there is racial friction. But there is also a “racial problem” if there is an area where there is no minority population, no “diversity.”

Over a hundred and twenty million Japanese, with a population more racially uniform than in any European country, has no “race problem.”

Red China, with ten times as many people and far more racial uniformity, has no “race problem.”

Sub-Saharan Africa, with a racial uniformity that would drive the integrators insane if it were white, has no race problem at all. A “race problem” exists only where whites predominate.

“Race problem” means “white problem.” The “solution to the race problem” always means “the solution to the white problem.”

Respectable conservatives never mention it, but the left uses code words. One of these is “the race problem.” This so-called “race problem” only exists in white-majority countries. When Australia limited immigration to whites only, it was a “race problem.” Any area which has an all-white population has a “race problem,” and needs to be integrated.

The one inevitable that every person who is allowed to speak out in our society is required to agree with is that, in the next millennium, “the race problem” will be solved.

Analog Magazine is the most prestigious publication in science fiction. Analog had always featured its cover art, beautiful representations of bold warriors and their women in ancient garb or in futuristic space uniforms doing heroic battle. They were all Nordics.

In the 1970s a liberal editor, Ben Bova, took Analog over for a short time. As a good liberal, Bova saw a future where there would be no Nordics. All white majority populations would, by then, be brown.

But Bova could not replace the Nordic features on his covers with pictures of random racial mixes. He did not want to put ugly people on the cover that was to sell his magazine. So throughout Bova’s short reign as editor, the uniforms or other clothes on the warriors covered their faces. You could never see what race they were.

Except once.

That one time during Bova’s editorship the race of the person on the cover was clearly shown. He was a pure black man, driving what appeared to be an anti-gravity tractor.

Several things were interesting about that one cover, but the one that is important here is something Bova did not even think about.

He insisted there would be no Nordics in the future, but he took it for granted there would be blacks. Africa would always have plenty of them, as would many Caribbean islands and the other solidly black countries of the world.

I am sure that it never occurred to any reader of the magazine that this was a totally racist, totally genocidal attitude. It is, after all, the only acceptable attitude of anyone who dares say a word in public in today’s society.

In many countries, you can go to prison for expressing any other attitude.

As we go into the third millennium, only one inevitable is left on which all allowable opinion agrees. That is that the new millennium will see the end of what liberals and moderates and respectable conservatives and the leaders who call themselves “Christian” conservatives all agree to refer to as “the race problem.”

All of our liberal, moderate, respectable conservative and so-called “Christian” leaders shout in unison that we must have “a final solution” to “the race problem.”

They shout about the dangers of “white racism” when we all know that we are targeted to disappear from the face of the earth. But anyone who even mentions this is declared anaziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews. And who is shouting the loudest? Respectable conservatives, of course, the people who call themselves the “conservers” of Western society!

Outside the United States, they don’t stop opposition to the last “inevitable” just by shouting and oppressing opponents economically. They use straight police state tactics. If you mention your concern with the disappearance of the white race from the earth in Canada, you are subject to criminal penalties. In Britain, under the race hate laws, a judge officially declared that “The truth is no excuse.”

In the cause of the code words “ending racism,” freedom of speech has simply ceased to exist throughout the Western world. In Canada, this jailing of people for expressing any white racial concern at all is already expanding to include sexism, criticizing gays and all other categories of Political Correctness.

And when it comes to racism, sexism, and more and more forms of Political Correctness, the Canadian courts are following the British judge’s dictum that “The truth is no excuse.”

There is already a tiny but growing reaction to this. This sort of criminalizing of Thought Crimes will be hard to sustain in the age of the Internet. But today’s conservatives will have no part in leading or taking advantage of this reaction.

So the so-called opposition in America shouts even louder that the only real problem in our society is that old code word, “racism.” The last thing you can depend on our so-called conservative opposition to the left to point to is the REAL problem.

This conservative dedication to genocide fits the pattern of what the Christian writer C. S. Lewis had in mind when he had Satan’s Senior Demon Screwtape give his formula for tricking men into eternal damnation. Screwtape explains to his nephew Wormwood how this sort of fashionable toadying is used to destroy humanity:

“The use of Fashion in thought is to distract the attention of men from their real dangers…The game is to have them all running around with fire extinguishers when there is a flood, and all crowding to that side of the boat which is already nearly gunwale under. Thus we make it fashionable to expose the dangers of enthusiasm at the very moment when they are all really becoming worldly and lukewarm…Cruel ages are put on their guard against Sentimentality…”

So today’s conservatives are helping liberals pursue this Screwtape approach. The real danger of the new century centers around the program to eliminate whites — or “the race problem.” Along with this program goes the War On Thought Crimes that is destroying freedom of thought and freedom of speech.

Meanwhile the right, which claims to be so Christian and so moral, is devoted only to being part of Fashionable Opinion on these issues.


No Comments


Written by White&Normal

I’m sure I’m not the only one to notice a surge in our terminology.

I’m also sure I’m not the only one to notice the term “anti-white racism”.

We all know this is bad and will inevitably lead to “They’re the REAL racists.”

We need to hammer our term “Anti-Whitism” into this discourse.

That is all.



BASICS: Black Vandalism With A Diploma

Written by Bob Whitaker

A Chevy Chase Movie in the 1970’s began with a little black boy going along with an old “church key” type bottle opener, down a line of parked cars, scraping the paint off each one by just holding the thing against the sides and walking.

Chase got his car out just in time, naturally then having a different disaster with it, and that was the joke. But the subtext that jumped out at me was the attitude the movie showed about the little black boy. No black people complained about that stereotype of a little black kid naturally doing his vandalism. Whites took it for granted, too.

The black boy’s vandalism was as routine for the 1970’s Yuppies the movie was made for as the garbage truck Chase then proceeded to ram his car into. They deal with it daily, routinely. They do not resent it because the black kid was not responsible for it. That’s the way blacks act.

“I’m gonna get you, sucka” is assumed to be a natural black attitude, and not just little street kids. When a black is pulled over, it is assumed that the cop is being racially prejudiced.

Actually there is no “prejudice” to it. People with black skins commit vastly more crimes than do people with white skins. No black is EVER mad at the BLACKS who DO this. They never mention it.

At all.

On Planet Earth, a black skin it exactly like any other clue. The cop doesn’t know you personally. If young blacks, half of whom are in the penal system, are driving slowly around a residential area, the REALITY is that they are far more likely to have criminal action in mind than they would be if their skins were white.

But if you are a black with a degree, the one thing Mommy Professor trained you think of is not the blacks who commit the crimes, but of the Evil Cops, including the black ones, who have to face reality every day.

Anti-whites will fly off the handle at this. But see if they can cite any black activists who blames the black criminals and vandals.



Robert W. Whitaker Archive Site

We have been working to form a legacy site for Robert W. Whitaker. A site that contains ALL of Bob’s work. A collection of all his articles and audios (which we are transcribing to articles to make searching them easier). The most important function of this site is the search function. Being able to search ALL of Bob’s work via specific key words is imperative, and with this new site, we have been able to achieve that.

The new archive site is For BUGSers this site will be a priceless tool for searching Bob’s thoughts on subjects. The site will also have 4 new articles automatically routating daily, so be sure to check it regularly to see articles you may have never read before.

So far we have loaded the old site and the original whitakeronline blog. We are presently working on getting BUGS up there too.

To build this new site, maintain his other sites, hosting, security and build costs, so far we are at $2,000. I have set up a GoFundMe account to help off set some of these costs. If you are able to contribute some dollars to keeping Bob’s legacy alive, it would be greatly appreciated. Here is the link to the GoFundMe –

About Robert W. Whitaker

Bob Whitaker  has been a college professor, international aviation negotiator, Capitol Hill staffer, Reagan Administration appointee, and writer for the Voice of America. He has written numerous articles and three books in his own name. He is perhaps best known for being the creator of The Mantra, a strategy to fight White Genocide. Robert resides now in Columbia, South Carolina.

Robert Whitaker was born in 1941. He entered the University of South Carolina at age sixteen and was a Political Science instructor at the age of nineteen. He then received a scholarship to study for a PhD in economics at the University of Virginia. Two of his eight graduate instructors there later won Nobel Prizes in Economics.

Both future Nobel Laureates left the University of Virginia while Robert was there. Robert’s second reader for his dissertation, James Buchanan, was “forced to leave” when a new dean took over who had vowed to “clean out that nest of right-wingers in the Economics Department.”

Robert was a professor of economics but was unable to complete his PhD because his field of specialization, Public Choice (the field in which the two graduate professors later won Nobel Prizes) was disliked after the faculty had been purged.

Robert then became involved in political activism and intelligence work.

Robert worked with William Rusher, publisher of National Review, in turning the so-called “Wallace Democrats” into “Reagan Democrats.” This was a move that respectable conservatives opposed vigorously. Robert’s 1976 book, A Plague on Both Your Houses, attacking both the liberal establishment and the watered-down Republican opposition, was a milestone in this campaign.

Robert worked on Capitol Hill from 1977 to 1982. During that period, two of his most personally gratifying accomplishments enjoyed today by all of us were saving the Hubble Telescopes and preventing the Internal Revenue Service from imposing racial quotas on private schools.

Despite his criticism of Ronald Reagan in A Plague on Both Your Houses, Robert was a Reagan appointee in charge of all civilian security clearances and federal staffing.

In 1982 Robert conceived and produced an anthology for St. Martin’s Press, The New Right Papers. It explained the strategy that led to Reagan’s 1980 victory by the people, including Robert himself, who made it a reality while conservatives dithered.

Robert left official Federal service in 1985. His third book, Why Johnny Can’t Think: America’s Professor-Priesthood goes into much more than just academia.





The Practical Wisdom of Robert Whitaker

This piece is written by Dave. It was an email from him regarding the importance of the archive site we are building of Bob’s work. I asked his permission to share this on BUGS, as it is great insight. Thanks, Dave! (More on the new archive site soon.)

I will tell you why I think Robert Whitaker’s writings are important.

First, some digression:

I am unique in that I come from a family were everybody marries late. I am no exception. For example, I am 67 years old, I married for the first time in my mid-fifties, and I now have a five year old child.

My whole family has been like that for generations. My paternal grandfather was born in 1883 and I knew him well into my teens. He died in the late 1960s in a world he could not recognize. My maternal grandfather, born in 1890, grew up in Virginia among aging Confederate Civil War veterans who he came to know well.

My grandfather told me when I was a child: “You cannot understand American history if you do not understand that the wrong side won the Civil War.”

You see, he had the actual face-to-face first person testimony of the Confederate veterans who fought the Civil War, so he knew what the Civil War was really about. It was an assault of European Imperialism on the American people. The Confederate veterans of the Civil War clearly understood it as such. The Union veterans, in contrast, were victims of
the propaganda of European Imperialism (sound familiar?).

This brings us to the unique importance of Robert Whitaker. Robert Whitaker understood that the memory that constitutes real history only lasts for three generations, and this is because the influence of face-to-face first person testimony only lasts three generations. Death erases accurate memory beyond three generations because you can only interface with three generations (normally) within one lifetime and therefore you only get three generations of first person testimony told face-to-face.

It is death that gives propaganda its opportunity. You see, the Civil War was real to my grandfather, even though he wasn’t born until 1890, because he had access to the face-to-face first person testimony of those that actually fought it.

I am in a similar position regarding WWI and WWII. Even though I was not born until the 1950’s because my grandfather, who I knew well, was in WWI and because my father, who I knew well, was in WWII, those wars are real to me. This is the influence of face-to-face first person testimony. Because of this, I know things that students of written histories (propaganda histories) cannot know.

For example, my father was in the front line British and American assault forces that stopped the German and Dutch advance on Antwerp on News Years Day in 1945 (the last high causality WWI style battle that British and Americans were ever in). They then carried out the recapture of the Ardennes, penetrated the Siegfried Line, took the Rhineland, and ended up in warehouses on the Elbe River in May of 1945 awaiting the conclusion of the Battle of Berlin.

If you said to my father, “The British and American allies won the War in Europe,” my father would have rolled his eyes. Those British and American soldiers that actually carried out the conclusion of World War II in Belgium and West Germany knew that the actual outcome was a defeat, not a victory. It is pure propaganda that the British and American
allies “won the War in Europe.” The soldiers that actually fought that war knew it was not true. Leaving half of Germany and all of Central
Europe in the hands of the Communists was not a victory, it was a defeat, and that is how THOSE SOLDIERS perceived it.

You will hardly ever hear that told in any written history (propaganda history) of WWII.

Robert Whitaker clearly understood the difference between real history and myth. He was unique in this. He understood the role of face-to-face first person testimony and how and why real history dies within a three generation time frame. He understood clearly HOW propaganda finds its opportunity.

And this brings us to Robert Whitaker’s other great insight, and that is the role of slogans in politics. I never understood big league politics until I began to study Robert Whitaker. I never understood that big league politics is really about slogans and that there is nothing more important than finding effective and durable slogans. Effective slogans put paid to fake history. Robert Whitaker taught me that if you want to defeat fake history, (fake history being an artifact of the role of death in human life), you must find effective slogans.

That insight is pure genius. Robert Whitaker was a genius, a practical genius, and that is WHY it is important to preserve Robert Whitaker’s writings.