A buddy of mine used to like to say, “I know I’m not an alcoholic because I am very disciplined in my drinking.”
“I only drink when I’m alone or with somebody.”
That is not very good advice on drinking, but it’s a very important consideration when you are making a point in revolutionary politics.
Most of my discussions with someone on the other side come up in public. It could be at a college cofffee-shop or in debate.
In a debate, there is no mercy. You are not there to convince your opponent, you are there to make everyone else in teh room happy THEY didn’t take the position your opponent did.
And since the position he is taking is exactly the one they WOULD have taken, you get your points across to a roomful of people.
The rules at a coffee table are a little more gentle, but not much. The listeners leave the table with the knowledge that the points they thought were just humanity and reason when they sat down are unspeakably absurd and a breach of the most elementary kind of loyalty.
But Mark has a point. You don’t want to alienate everybody, and in discussion with a single person you should be less outraged.
Rather than saying it the way I did, maybe Peter should have repeated Bob’s Mantra:
“Everybody says there is this RACE problem. Everybody says this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours in EVERY white country and ONLY into white countries. ”
“The Netherlands and Belgium are more crowded than 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.”
“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 obviously am advocating the final solution to the BLACK problem.”
“And how long would it take any sane black man to notice and what kind of psycho black man wouldn’t object to this?”
***Now let me use Mark’s advice and chance the last sentence. I STILL think this advice is only good in dealing with a SINGLE PERSON. I WANT the listeners to see the person who called me a Nazi in an impossible position.***
***But this is not Bob’s Wordism, this is Bob’s Blog. If another approach WORKS, let’s grab it.***
***Here is my new proposed last sentence for a single person exchange:***
“But if I say that, I’m a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews. Is it fair to say that any white man who says what I just said is a Nazi?”
“Anti-racist is just a code word for anti-white.”
I need INPUT on this!
#1 by Peter on 12/19/2005 - 4:59 pm
Since the mans I spoke to agrees with the mantra, my plan of action is to slip them into normal conversation whenever convenient.
Mark is right and his info on sales is always interesting. In sales, you are only working with one or two persons whereas in a debate you know that you will convince someone in the audience. So working on one person at a time is harder. The salesman’s only advantage is that he has a handy measure of his success: Did the person buy something? (By the way, the Germans’ measure was getting the person to sign up right away to volunteer for the party.)
#2 by joe rorke on 12/19/2005 - 8:53 pm
I have listened to a talk you gave wherein you said that “racism” or “race” or “racist” is synonomous with kinship. I can’t remember the exact talk but it’s here in my house somewhere. This struck a chord with me immediately as so much of your output does. I prefer the word kinship to racism. It is a much warmer, all-embracing, easier word to understand. There is, in my opinion, a reason for this. The words “race” and “racism” and “racist” have been so maliciously and erroneously used by the Corporate Media that I think the common folk get nervous around that word. But kinship, ah, that’s another game. That word sounds warm and familial and exclusive. It sounds discriminating. I like it. So I substitute it for the aforementioned words all the time. It makes understanding clearer. That’s my opinion.