Simmons just came up with a good idea:

NOT SPAM If I could add something to your repetition ideas. I would like to add the word “Why”
to our vocabulary. We should always be asking “why” of PC, and we should always be challenging
the authority of PC amongst our target audience, hence the word “why.”

Comment by Simmons

As with all seminars, most of the good participants do some “practical” outside the classroom. In our case, a large part ofhtat consists of the work we are preparing for here: Spreading the word, talking to people.

Let’s develope Sommons’s concept.

Ideally someone would say that people are equal or at least, people have rights. I would love to hear how they react if you were to say, “Why is that?”

Now, you are not necessairily trying to MAKE a point. You just want to find out what you can by making THEM think. So don’t get off the point. WHY did he say that? What reason does he have to believe that people are equal, or even that people have rights?

I want somebody besides me and you to have to some thinking about basics. If he has some rational answer, you don’t have to press him. But if yu do this a number of times, you may get some interesting results. In any case, the person you ask this of will never forget that somebody actually ASKED him that.

Don’t make it a fight, just drraw him out. DO NOT LET HIM GET OFF THE POINT.

Secondly, remember that HE said it so HE should give you some reason for it. I have had a lot of enjoyable conversations this way, but I can’t give a blow-by-blow to handle it the way I can a number of other things. This would take practice. I don’t KNOW what you will get out of it.

But, as Simmons says, it’s a hell of an exercise nobody ever forgets. NOBODY asks them “Why?” in Ameriuca any more than they would in Soviet Russia.

DON’T let them throw the argument back to you:

“How can you have a civilized society if you DON’t bellive human beings have rights?”

“YOU said people have rights. Now you say it isn’t true, but a civilized society requires it. So you are ot longer sayingit is true, you are saying I HAVE to believe it. That’s not hte same thing.”

Or:

“Every social animal besides man has a regular pecking order. Why must MEN be equal?”

“No social animal allows outsiders ANY rights. Why should we?”

Remember we are doing real graduate work here. In our day, “Graduate work is exactly the same as undergraduate work. Graduate and undergraduate students sit inthe same class most ofhte time, and the grads just do more than the undergrads and have to make better grades. It’s the same.

But there was a time when Karl Marx got his Doctor of Philosophy degree in one week, because all he had to do was comeup with a thesis and defend it. As a REAL graduate student,w hat you must do here is some up with your own approach and report back.

Today, just as undergraduates and graduats are the same thing, no one says any more htat a professor is LEADINF a seminar. I think any college student or professor would look at you funny if yu used that expression. In any case, he would conisder it quaint.

Today, a prpofessor TEACHES a seminar. After you have learned what he has to say and done the prescroibed reading, you sdpend a year doing two papers that are called theses. The trick is do something that goes right along with “the literature,” what is being said in academia right now, and fit something uncontroversial into it.

Then you become aprofessor and you spread the exact same word you were given to captive students. You do NOT think outside the bxo. Which has led to what we all expect. Therehas not been one single interesting idea coming out of the social sciences for a century. Only a ffew full professors who have tenure and do not look forward to any grants or any promotiojn ever come up with anything that is interesting or surprising.

So what THEY call a seminar fits into this stagnant bureaucracy.

So I send y9u out to do your own use of Simmons’s idea. I give you a couple of pointers like staying on the point and never letting THEM use YOU as an excuse for saying what they said. I recommend you try to make it an interesting conversation rather than a battle, which is what we usually do.

From there on, it’s your baby. I want you to report to me your sucesses and failures. This is the place to discuss how to get around the roadblocks.

I have a lot of good stuff you need. That is why I am LEADING this seminar. I have some good stuff to ADD to Simmons’s idea, and I am a good judge of his idea’s potential. But your test comes out there. Your test is how much intellectual satisfaction you get from being here. That is NOT undergraduate work.

I just wrote a piece below about the decades of agony PeterGene Budarick and I have in common. We SAW what would happen today back when Europe was lily-white. But no one would listen.

In the course of that piece I pointed out to Budarick that being WRONG is not our problem. Our problem is to deal with being RIGHT. LibAnon confirms this from his own point of view.

LibAnon also thanks me for calling him “comrade.” Screw liberal versus conservative. I’m happy to have you in trench the beside me, comrade.

NOT SPAM
Bob, you say it’s a lot harder to be right than to be wrong. Well, I can confirm that from precisely the opposite perspective. I’ve been utterly WRONG my entire life, and it didn’t hurt a bit. In the wake of September 11 and Katrina, however, a few things finally started to dawn on me. Now it’s all I can do to hang on to my sanity, not to mention my friends and my livelihood.
So, am I happy I finally woke up from the pleasant little dream that was my life? I can’t yet honestly say that I am, although something has already happened to me in this new life that I wouldn’t want to have missed: being called a comrade by a teacher who has earned my respect. That’s new to me, and it feels good.

Comment by LibAnon

Budarick’s comment makes me feel good because it is an explosion of JOY.

He is FINALLY talking to somebody who has been through what he has been through.

Nothing Budarick said has been wrong. His problem is that he has spent a lifetime knowing what is right. That is much, MUCH harder than simply being wrong.

I want to coach Budarick in how to handle a lifetime of being right, watching everything decent being destroyed, when you, like Budarick and I, are the kind of person who was born to lead your people.

We watched our people destroying themselves, we saw what Stormfronters are FINALLY beginning to realize decades ago, and we had to watch helplessly as they accepted “leaders” who would make a tick look like a giant.

This is AGONY. This is an agony that has lasted for two generations.

So when Budarick got a chance to blow his gasket, he did so. He blew his top on Stormfront. They haven’t been through that, and, PeterGene, they are the ones we have to deal with.

So I have to try to explain to you how to deal with them. I have the same fire in my gut that you do. Why can’t they just empathize and understand?

The reason they can’t empathize and understand is because what we have been through is so unique.

Compared to that, losing an arguement is nothing.

When you go through agony like that, admitting that you are factually wrong is not even as painful as stubbing a toe.

He has gone through all that, and now Budarick recognizes me as a fellow sufferer and someone who can tell him how to handle being RIGHT, PAINFULLY right, for so VERY long.

Budarick and I have no problem at all with objectivity because we know are NOT purely objective. Loyalty is in our bones.

We know exactly where we stand subjectively. So when a comrade like LibAnon gives me some objective advice, advice about how I can fight for my loyalties, it is appreciated.

But all I managed to say was that a decent person does not mind being objectively wrong. I of out of my way to make flat statements oprenly so they can be openly disputed. But I longed to explain why this was so easy for me.

I have spent my entire life fighting people who were not just factually wrong, but who were actually, literally EVIL. If you have been through THAT, if THAT has been your entire life, being corrected factually by a comrade, such an agony to so many, is just something you are grateful for.

In the piece PeterGene commented on, I explained that it was easy for me to admit I was wrong. I could only hope someone would get the rest of the message:

Compared to the agony of being so right for so long, admitting one is wrong is nothing. If you have experienced real agony, yu are pretty brave about a pin prick.

But I couldn’t say that. I would have sounded like The Greatest Generation, and the very idea makes me sick to my stomach.

There was no way for me to make the point I wanted to make.

Budarick to the rescue!

Budarick spread out his guts to us. He talked about his agony. He talked about his illusions (which I remember sharing, but that’s another story). And he said that Bob Whitaker was the only professor he would accept.

I’ll deal with Budarick’s specifics later. But this is Bob’s Blog and let me Egize. Right now the point is that I have another person who has lived this agony and sees me as his professor, his seminar leader.

In addition, Petergene allowed me to make the REST of the point.

For every Budarick or Whitaker, there are a thousand who learned to love Big Brother. If you hear from us, you are hearing from a tiny minority who were ALWAYS sane.

And PeterGene says I amnot only one of them, I am a LEADER in that select fraternity.

Budarick says he thinks Ole Bob may be able to give him some points on how to deal with the seemingly impossible task of getting rid of Big Brother.

This is Bob’s Blog. The point is that the comments below made Bob feel very, very good:

Bob, you realize that you can be wrong.

No surprise!

I always sensed that you are an honest man, but i am impressed by eloquence in stating it, and raisng issues from it, worthy of our consideration.

Let me tell it from my perspective.

I am sort of here telling you what your Blogs evoke in my mind and WHY i am attracted to them.

First of all I am a German and a NAZI [not Neo-Nazi] who wants to exterminate 60 million Jews [ 6 million is far too few] and i am proud of my crudeness. I have survived nearly 60 years without hurting a hair on a child’s head and i sleep like baby each night! And i have created my own flag too which is NOT even the Nazi Flag but far more prevocative.

As a 8-yo boy i thought i was the reincarnation of Hitler and i told everyone about it. How honest and foolish children are! “Ich bin Hitler” I have no idea how that came into my head even [you are the first one i have told it to Bob – it never seemed important before].

In Germany 1955 that was a NO NO for a boy child to do. But i did it, and i did not know why until about 50 years later! Therefore i copped a lot of abuse as a child. I was “that NAZI kid” even though my biological father was a USA GI [Scandinavian descent] stationed in Germany who abandoned me and my mother at age 1-yo!

OK, lets get on the ball.

I got no way of knowing if Bob is wrong.

Only Bob can know that.

And ONLY Bob can fix that.

AND only Bob can understand what that fixing means from his perspective.

So i am not worried about Bob being wrong or being able to fix it – if indeed it needs fixing.

Because sometimes being wrong DOES NOT NEED fixing!!!

I am an anti-Semite. That is WRONG! No doubt about it! But it needs NO fixing!!! But if i were to tell you all “but i love Jews” then i would have a major problem.

Now i figure Bob is a racist.

I don’t believe that needs fixing!

And you note it does not even need putting “racist” in quotes.

Why?

Because Bob is concerned about the white race.

Not like DDD’s concern with being labelled KKK.

KKK was a valid movement and mostly they did nothing wrong!

So DDD should wear it as a badge of honour as i wear Hitler as a badge of honour.

I figure Bob can handle that stuff/ideas and far more.

For me that means trust in Bob.

Now i reveal,

I am WRONG most of the time.

Does that feel bad for me?

Yes it does! BIG TIME!

If it no loger feels bad, then the application of a certain small sword the Japanese Samurai carried in their daishu may be in order!

Does it feel bad for YOU that i am mostly wrong?

Well i will NEVER be your hero!

Should therefore the mostly wrong Peter-Gene be banned from this Blog as he has been banned from StromFront?

Of course not it is silly!

OK.

To the main point now!

Being wrong sure beats living a life of delusion!

Right?

Follows naturally since we all suffer pain in life and must die!

I am wrong not because people tell me, though often they DO help me see it – even when they have other motives [being themselves always right is one of them].

But i do need other people to help me!

I need Bob to help me!

I am proud of the fact that i get it wrong MOST of the time!

Yes MOST of the time!

I pity people who are always right.

They don’t learn or evolve.

I admire Bob because he understands these things and can express them in a completely different language to what i use.

I conceptualize it like this: Suppose we are doing science.

That means making a model [which is a creative act] and most likely will end up a wrong model. It involves fantasy, imagination, intuition, rationalism [math], life experience and having a go at a problem without fear or respect for conservatism or morality. And there is emotional investment in that model and thus it is not easy to give it up.

Then you do experiments and try to show that your model in Reality [your mind] is isomorphic with the “object” or “process” in Actually [WHAT IS] it is supposed to represent.

Most times this scientific work shows you that you are wrong.

So true scientists are always a tiny minority.

Why?

Because NORMAL people like to be right all the time.

Well for them i recommend religion. Something which can’t be proven wrong! Which is quite valid BTW because it has been part of our evolution toward white Godhood a lot longer than science.

But back to being a scientist.

It is like prospective parents [before they have children] have theories about how children respond and behave etc. But when they actually have their own children and actually have to raise them in the real world, they soon realize that all their theories are wrong.

If that sort of thing gets one down then one is not cut out to be a scientist or a parent [or mentor of childen as in my case].

Truth is WHAT IS. And like in a good soccer match it always hits us from a side where and when we least expect it.

Well that is what Bob said too in his Blogs! Right?

Watch the ball not the feet!

But we shall never find truth [from moment to moment] unless we have the motivation to engage with life and become exposed to the fact that we are going to be mostly wrong.

It is in this spirit that i engage with Bob.

PGB

Comment by PeterGene Budarick