I can relate to this in this way. When I married, a hundred years ago, I can honestly say I NEVER married for money. He was cute, nearly six feet, blue eyes, deep voice, but what got me is that I knew he intended to do his DAMNEDEST. Neither of us had any money, but I wanted a REAL home and a REAL family.
So I understand that it’s what a person REALLY wants that matters.Unfortunately those who seek power now, seem to want nothing at all , but phony accolades. Perhaps to cover an awful emptyness.
— Shari
You are confusing POWER and POSITION.
Dave’s comment on power referred to Nixon, and he has the same confusion. Someone once made an observation that really impressed me, “Nixon ran for office to BE something. Regan ran to DO something.”
Nixon wanted to BE a congressman, he wanted to BE president. But if Nixon had never been born, I doubt history would have been changed noticably. There were a hundred interchangable young men in 1946 who could have done the same things. POWER is t ability to CHANGE things.
Nixon had no POWER.
For me the outstanding thing about this election is that no POWER is involved. Neither Obama or Hillary represents any POWER. McCain would do what another traitor would do.
Power, position, money, these are as distinct as good looks, health, wealth and a happy marriage. Each is a FACTOR but there is as much trade off among them as there is direct relationshiup.
I hope to hell I get some thoughts on THAT.
#1 by Dave on 04/23/2008 - 12:11 pm
I agree that Reagan was not a narcissist. The great thing about Reagan, hard to find in leaders, and he was criticized for it, is that he did not sweat the load.
That was proof he was not narcissistically involved in what he was doing.
Contrast this with Carter who became goony under the pressure, or Clinton who was in fact behaviorally completely out of hand, or Nixon who just blew out in a case of bad judgment about everything.
But power comes from an authentic voice that doesn’t resort to the phoniness of “anthem”, in the way of Martin Luther King or Adolph Hitler.
Now here’s something you will never see elsewhere: A comparison of King and Hitler, two narcissists who wanted to do things that don’t make sense, and who both had a marvelous gift for anthem style oratory to draw the gullible into their “cult”.
I will go with a Wallace, before he rolled over. But he was horribly maimed. Few understand what it means to have that happen to you. But he wasn’t a narcissist, his voice was authentic, he didn’t resort to anthems, and all he wanted to do is stop something preposterous from happening.
We are now living with the preposterous happening Wallace attempted to prevent, outcomes of the aims of the religious fervor of Political Correctness. Our entire nation has become an Indian Reservation in consequence. This is a place where nonwhites speak the white man’s tongue, having forgotten their own, live the white man’s life because they could never tolerate a life that is actually their own, and require white men to respect their traditions, which don’t exist in practice, and are not worthy of respect.
Preposterous situations can go on a long time. Look at the UK for crying out loud. Society there is so bizarre even the most imaginative novelist couldn’t make it up. But the only way out of preposterous situations is to grow in conscience. In that the future is created. And out of that an authentic voice springs into being.
Adolph Hitler and Martin Luther King types can never create the future. As far the Hillary’s, McCain’s, and Obama’s, let’s be honest: They all are just ordinary careerists, a dime a dozen, with us always.
And BW is right: they have no power.
#2 by shari on 04/23/2008 - 12:45 pm
Aren’t we constantly fed a confusion of power and position? I understand that most think that the president is very powerful, “the leader of the free world and all that.” I myself, don’t really understand where power comes from and how it works, but I do understand that motive, what someone WANTS is very important. I’m interested in understanding this better.
#3 by backbaygrouch4 on 04/23/2008 - 6:34 pm
Power = Position + Will.
Position = Power – Will.
#4 by AFKANNow on 04/24/2008 - 1:52 am
This is AFKAN, after a system failure.
Bob’s point is well-made, and the comments deserve comment:
Yet, we note that power really only has value in the sense that it moves towards the fulfillment of a transcendent purpose; absent that, it is brittle, and only lasts as long as you can hold a knife at the throats of the servants. In the case of the Soviet Union, for example, it took less than a century to have the modern totalitarian state collapse, in one form, and transform itself into its organic Forms – (White) Russia, and Asia.
I have been thinking about the Forms of White Nationalism as of late, and I think one of the reasons the best Idea, with the best Ideals, has not achieved widespread acceptance is its failure to define a Great Purpose that people will choose to bind their lives to, knowing that the Purpose may take fulfillment well after their lives have passed.
The Asiatic Consciousness does this by its very nature; true Individuation, one of the hallmarks of the Western Soul, is literally impossible in Asia. Thus, filial relationships are the foundation of the social order. Yet, the very deep roots from which the Asiatic Hive Consciousness is based – essentially, filial relationships, with Duty ot Family (remember that, you’ll set it again!) above all.
Emperors and Dynasties come and go; the Family unit remains sacrosanct. A meritorious system of governance with shared values, relentlessly indoctrinated into all levels of society – the Confucian Code of Laws – guarantees that all social decisions are decided within well understood and shared Guidelines.
The fat peasant, Mao, with the most brutal dictatorship of modern times, stopped this system from fulfilling its purpose for forty years.
Mao want to BE Emperor, but not really to BE the Servant of the Mandate of Heaven.
Let’s look at the POWER versus POSITION range in the light of a model from basic organization design – STRUCTURE versus PROCESS.
STRUCTURE refers to the differentiation and patterning of relationships within an organization; PROCESS refers to the interactions within and between the elements of the STRUCTURE.
Nixon – and Mao – saw themselves in terms of their place in the STRUCTURE. Both were ultimately undone by the PROCESS – Nixon, by the bureaucracy, and Mao, by his attempt to place the Communist Party over the Confucian Mandarin System. Mao simply placed political thugs in place of the meritocratic Mandarinate. The strong informal ties that form Asian social orders kept the System going, until the moment Mao died. Then, the Meritocracy Mandarinate began to fill in the blanks of the social order. The Confucian Examinations will return to China, formally, as I suspect they have, informally.
This has something more with White Nationalism than we might imagine.
The Parasite’s attack on the Family, as the foundation of society, worked beautifully to divide and conquer the very foundation of – wait for it – Race, and thus, Racial Consciousness.
THAT involved reordering the STRUCTURE of our society, pretty much from infancy, forward.
We have focused on Race, and correctly so.
We have allowed the Parasite to define Race solely as a matter of STRUCTURE, while they have worked relentlessly to undermine and redefine that STRUCTURE.
Yet, organically, Race is a matter of PROCESS.
Race, as a PROCESS, is the Living Bridge between Family and Culture.
Just as the Family is the Race, in microcosm, so, too, is the Race the Family in macrocosm, with the qualitative element of being a Living Bridge between Family and Culture.
We seem to have missed this.
Thus, when Kevin Phillips and Pat Buchanan wrote of Nixons’s Southern Strategy – attract the blue collar White guys, and ALL of the White people – the Parasite was busy passing dysgenic welfare laws, AND insuring the Immigration Act of 1965, which was designed to remove a White Majority from political power, moved forward right on schedule.
Nixon could BE President, but his power to CHANGE society was limited by his Vision of America; while he looked one way, structural reforms moved forward that ultimately would thwart all of his dreams, and, in time, will remove the Republican Party from political power, save as a Southern rump party.
Nothing has changed, by the way.
All THREE Presidential candidates support “immigration reform” that will insure the end of a White majority in America.
Ironically, the Faithful Colored Companions, the strongest supporters of Obama, will suffer horrifically from the Mexican Reconquista.
After all, the Mexicans want to be White, and Americans.
Their view of the Faithful Colored Companions is one of such naked hostility as to make one realize the best hope for the Black Man, is to be safe under the protection of the White Man.
I’ve seen this in Real Life; the Mexicans go on the attack, and do not back down against the faithful Colored Companions.
Unlike their White counterparts…
#5 by Simmons on 04/24/2008 - 11:32 am
This goes back to a Bob post about the Mantra take of history. Rome became a conglomeration of cults that each emporer having to work thru and around to do the business of government (staying the government and enriching friends). The cult theory of polity is the same today, especially the Democratic side of the polity, rigidly segregated cults with very little contact amongst them. Do the Black Nazis care about Global Warming and polar bears, or Israel?
Even whites on the GOP side have drifted off into cults, cargo or religous. The crew cut men of the 50s and 60s gaves us the Apollo program the men of today glorify the Ipod. Our structure and process are horribly disfigured, barely functional.
So I conclude we are constrained from our destiny by cult thinking (which is not thinking at all but reliance on magic such as oil will always be there, where?) We are the most constipated fearful society on Earth outside of the hives of backward Asia. 7 billion people reside on Earth the vast majority live in constant fear that their beliefs will be challenged and held up for inquiry, I on the other hand fear that mine won’t.
#6 by unjew on 04/25/2008 - 6:22 am
OK, I have to ask: What exactly didn’t make sense in the National Socialist’s Party program?
Mentioning together Hitler and a drunken nigger in the same sentence is a tactic best learned at the local yeshiva. Something like guilt by association, but smellier. And what’s with the “Adolph”? Are you trying to sound eminently intellectualisic ‘n shit? You’re not Whitacker, get over it. Trying to be all arty-farty will cause you to stain your pants, at most.