AFKAN, I was stunned to see that you answered Bob’s response to your comment with almost the exact same comment and did not address his suggestions. You seem to be looking for an intellectual position in the pro-white field rather than a hands-on working position. If that’s the case I don’t blame you because no professor would want to teach those who are hostile or don’t want to listen.
On another note, I think there is no way today to eliminate the need for making arguments at length. I think there are many who simply don’t trust arguments that are short and sweet (despite the fact that the shortest proofs are the most elegant). They want to know if the “smart people” believe this stuff too, and they want the bibliographies to see what other smart people believe in it. I don’t see a substitute for a thick book by an author with name recognition to supplement a given mantra.
As far as Harold Covington goes, he is a One True Way man who burned out years ago and spends almost all of his time complaining about the movement (or non-movement) and attacking its leadership and rank-and-file (I guess what you would call a “Webb”). He would surely attack you, AFKAN, for TALKING about his “analytical framework” instead of putting your stuff in a van and heading to the northwest.
Comment by Al Parker
#1 by Dave on 05/16/2007 - 12:03 pm
Al Parker says,
“On another note, I think there is no way today to eliminate the need for making arguments at length.”
I disagree:
Make no mistake about it: It is essential to eliminate arguments at length.
Real information and real knowledge are always concise, short, deep, and powerful:
For example:
Richard says: “This blog is concerned with the people who don’t think, and how to influence them without them realizing it.”
Alan says: “Mommy Professor’s Talking Dolls”
Mark says: “Those who own the present own the Future. Those who own the present NEVER have any serious relationship to what is really going to happen.”
I could go on and on.
But get the point?
Academia could be destroyed with BW’s ‘brevity rule”.
Academia needs to be destroyed.
#2 by AFKAN on 05/16/2007 - 3:16 pm
The Artist Formerly Known As Nobody replies to Dave:
Your points are well made, and hopefully well taken.
In my Younger Days, my memoranda were the soul of brevity, and were written to be understood by people at the Sixth Grade level of schooling, wherever possible.
I misunderstood the nature of Bob’s Seminar.
I firmly believe that we must be able to explain to people, in terms they can understand and will help to inspire them, WHY we believe, WHAT we believe.
In trying to drain the swamp, many of us have become trapped in the swamp, and so certain changs must be undertaken and instituted.
If you read my post regarding Metzger’s Insight – it was in a thread responding to you, you can easily realize that a new Mindset is required to do what needs to be done, in the times ahead.
Thanks for all of your advice, and guidance, Dave.
I really do appreciate it. It has helped enormously in crystallizing my Idea as to What Must Be Done, and Why.
It would help is there was an Introduction stating WHAT the Seminar is trying to do, and HOW it is trying to do it.