The Mantra forces the question of white genocide. Anti-whites avoid the Mantra because it is so deadly to them.
Once the FACT of genocide against whites becomes front and center, the entire argument is transformed. White genocide is part and parcel of the religion of political correctness, exactly as slavery in the South and in New York City and the slave trade in New England were part and parcel of the American economy.
What is to be done about this white genocide? On slavery the attempt was made to deal with “non-racial issues,” precisely as anti-whites advocate today relative to white genocide. Less than twenty years before the Civil War, the Liberty Party and the Free Soil Party each got less than one percent of the vote.
Debate on slavery on the floor of congress was under the Gag Rule.
So today it is a bit absurd for us to be arguing over white nationalism or National Socialism or other details of the future. Those who argue White Guilt for genocide do not argue in detail over HOW we repay for our evil. They simply want this as an argument to keep whites from wanting whites to avoid genocide.
In fact the same black leadership that decided the word “niggardly” was invented by eighth-century Saxons to insult blacks also demanded dollar reparations. This is a BAD tactic. The first thing you run into is that American blacks are many times richer than the entire black population of all black countries combined. This is exactly the kind of reality that Mommy Professor trains his little anti-white tape recorders NOT to think about.
So those of us who use the Mantra stick with stating the REALITY, which is genocide. We do NOT get into an endless argument about HOW to save the white race. The best argument against ending slavery was always to get into the specifics of freeing them and what to do with them.
Blacks had a right to be free. We have a right to survive.
PERIOD.
We of the Mantra will not yield an inch on this point: Our race has a right to survive. Once that point gains the slightest public realization – THE SLIGHTEST – then the search for a means and an opportunity will come.
For some reason, I have to keep REMINDING my comrades that the very MENTION of white survival has them screaming that you are anaziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews. We must get to the point where “Slavery must end” and white genocide must end” can no longer be drowned out by shouts of Abolitionist or Racist.
One anti-white asked Mommy Professor’s question, “Are we in 1800 or 2009?”
My reply was that HE is 1800, still fighting the New England slave trade, while I am 2009, TRYING TO INSTILL A CONSCIENCE on the issue of white genocide.
If you give their specific objections time but avoid the basic moral question, you are fighting their fight FOR them. If you talk about Obama or Jews and don’t bring THIS up, you are helping the anti-whites:
The White Mantra:
AFRICA FOR THE AFRICANS, ASIA FOR THE ASIANS, WHITE COUNTRIES FOR EVERYBODY!
“It is said that there is this RACE problem. They say this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours into EVERY white country and ONLY into white countries.”
“The Netherlands and Belgium are as crowded as 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.”
“Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY white country and ONLY white countries to “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites.”
“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 am talking about the final solution to the BLACK problem?”
“And how long would it take any sane black man to notice this and what kind of psycho black man wouldn’t object to this?”
“But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against my race, the white race, Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that I am ANAZIWHOWANTSTOKILLSIXMILLIONJEWS.”
They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white.
“ANTI-RACIST IS A CODE WORD FOR ANTI-WHITE.”
#1 by shari on 02/08/2009 - 12:19 pm
This is why I think that v-dare is worth some support. I keep repeating GENOCIDE. So far they don’t come right out and say, well that’s right, but I think that most of them are not against us, calling us infantile. Any day now, I hope.
#2 by thedude on 02/08/2009 - 12:37 pm
“We do have the right to survive”. Damn right!
I never try to compare “white” genocide with let’s say, “slavery or Nazi concentration camps”, it usually gives the person I’m talking with the wrong mental image. I usually will go the route of “their daughter being gang raped by a group of blacks” or “their wife being beaten by a herd of minorities”, something very based in reality. That creates a real image of “white persecution”.
I always attack and never go into Alamo mood.
Remember the Alamo? They hunkered down and lost that battle. Hell, the Mexicans could have starved them to death if they wanted to and never wasted a single man.
Frankly, we need to be in our politicians faces with one basic question which is: What are you doing to advance “white” interests? If they respond with BS, call them anti-white and do it again tomorrow.
We have nothing to lose!
#3 by Dave on 02/08/2009 - 11:07 pm
One thing I ruminate on is Mark’s Brilliant Line: “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.”
It is a prosaic aphorism. It points to ordinary errors intellectuals typically make.
The notion of criticizing the world from the standpoint of what you believe “ought to be” is wrong. Yet most of what stands for analysis and assessment among intellectuals contains this error.
No matter what you may believe, things are the way are because it is not possible for things to be any other way, right down to the most insignificant details.
So when Robert Whitaker says, “If you give their specific objections time but avoid the basic moral question, you are fighting their fight FOR them. If you talk about Obama or Jews and don’t bring THIS up, you are helping the anti-whites”, it makes me think that perhaps I am just too angry.
I have always been a good fighter because I am not a cat that ever chases its tail. To me, it all falls into place very logically. But it hasn’t occurred to me that “the basic moral question” is sown into a world that is free to be only what it is absolutely cannot avoid being. To tell you the truth, I have always believed moral notions to be a confusion of mind.
The Japanese sergeant in the Imperial Army had it right when young Buddhist draftees objected by telling their sergeant of their conviction in the wrongness of killing. “It is impossible for you to kill anyone. It can never happen under any circumstance. If the enemy foolishly stumbles in front of your bullet, that is his misfortune. You had nothing to do with it.”
Where’s the role of morality in that trajectory?
If the “deed to be forged” is about the right to white survival as a matter of conscience, it makes me think that all effort I have expended planning a method of attack may be the wrong approach. (Maybe I am the reincarnation of one the victims of the firebombing of Dresden so it is hard for me to get the role that conscience plays in the world.)
But then again, maybe I have suffered too much indoctrination from “the Greatest Generation”.
Robert Whitaker has put me on my laurels this time. I am going to have to think about it.
#4 by AFKANNow on 02/09/2009 - 2:10 am
I have been spending my time focusing on how to summarize what I read in as few words as possible, to make it easier for my Nephews to GET IT as quickly, and solidly, as possible.
I was watching the movie “Network,” now THIRTY years old, and remember the first time it came out, and how people in the theater cheered when Peter Finch gave his first soliloquy, ending with the phrase, “I’m Mad As Hell, AND I’m Not Going To Take It Any More!”
I realized where we have gone wrong.
We have acting on the basis of intellectual discussion – soft, safe, removed from the horrors of physical battle – and we lost the power that accrues to us when we are angry, just blind, flat-out, MAD, at Something Happening that is just plain wrong.
ANGER is the motivator, the fire that clears away the fog of learned helplessness.
And, my God, where did we learn to be rational with the irrational, to discuss issues politely with people who are trying to engage in damn GENOCIDE against our Family, our RACE, and all of Civilization?
The Obamanation has really crystallized the Race Issue for White people, who realize they have been softly gelded into losing their standards of living, their homes, their pension funds, and all they have worked for all of their life.
And that anger – that nascent damn RAGE – is something we can work with.
The Nephews got this before I did, and they chastised me:
“Uncle, why do you argue with these people? Why negotiate, when all they want to do is destroy us, by any means necessary?”
Anger, with the Mantra Mentality – “I am arguing about the future of my Family, my Posterity, Civilization? NO! DAMN IT, NO! It’s time to start kicking ass, and chewing bubble gum; and I’m all out of bubble gum!”
No More Being Rational With The Irrational!
More to follow.
#5 by Simmons on 02/09/2009 - 10:54 am
Things being the way they are, any of us could go onto any website or into any discussion anywhere and say, “Perhaps they are just anti-white” in relationship to any of the issues that deal with the grievance industry.
The Mantra is Occam’s razor, perhaps 50 years ago only a Bob would have thought that way, but by now it is fairly obvious and all the possible answers or solutions boil it down to this simple rejoinder, “they are just anti-white.”
#6 by The Dude on 02/09/2009 - 6:07 pm
Actually 50 years ago there were more Bob’s then now. Bob’s used to come out in force and protest in the south.
I remember hearing “Our Bob” do a show years ago on Stormfront where he talked about the WW2 generation as being the worse generation.
They seemed to just bend over on the subject which is now in our face which is “race matters and we are in deep you know what”. They cowered in the face of a verbal assualt on them and instead giving us victory they gave us this.
No I think I like the Mantra and I think I like to put it peoples faces.
#7 by heretic on 02/13/2009 - 11:27 pm
Hi everyone; I’m new here. I’d like to be allowed to stick around because it’s become rapidly apparent to me that folks here see quite clearly, and know a great deal. I seriously don’t have enough time for Stormfront.
Anyway, I do believe the fundamental issue to our people is the genocidal population replacement program; and I agree very much with the “Mantra mentality” and getting straight to the real issue.
However, I can’t comfortably use Bob’s Mantra at this point because if I were anti-White I would have an objection to it. Explanation follows.
A few (six-ish) years ago I was in a first year (ahem) “English” class, taught by a White woman with two black children and a degree in “Women’s Studies” (not in what currently passes for “English”). I was studying for a paper I had to do on some novel written by a black woman about a little black girl in the ’40’s who went crazy because of the inferiority complex created by being exposed to images of White beauty (Shirley Temple being used as an archetype).
So anyways, I was trying to research on race and sexuality and naturally had to pour through mountains of W.E.B. Dubois related “literature” about how blacks need to be protected from my insecurity about the size of my penis. (“The canon is expanding”, they told me. Pun intended.)
I came across a good read from the early 1970’s by a black “civil rights leader” named Eldridge Cleaver. You might have heard of this one, it’s called “Soul on Ice”. Anyway this guy bragged in his (disturbingly poetic and articulate) book about how he had raped multiple White women, had many explanations for how White women could never be sexually satisfied by White men, proved that obviously blacks who committed “crimes” were clearly only imprisoned by insecure White males in order to keep them from having sex with White women, ect. ect. The good Mr. Cleaver ended up marrying a White or Jewish (not sure; didn’t know what a Jew was back then) woman who described herself as a “feminist” and was a lawyer for the Black Panthers.
The premise of this book was that all black males should inherit a White female to breed with in order to eliminate the “class distinctions” that were enforced by skin colour and hindered class mobility. Now, printed on the back cover of the book were of course positive reviews of it from numerous sources intended to sell the book (I think the New York times was one but I’m not sure). One was from Norman Mailer, who was the Jew who wrote Native Son (I have yet to read that one). Something about a “Shocking but powerful solution to the race problem in America.”
I specifically remember this because the phrase, “race problem” caught my eye – I had never seen or heard of it before. And barring Bob’s mantra, nor have I since. My eyes were of course starting to open at that time and I of course clued in to the idea that “the race problem” was in fact “the White problem,” but pondered what people who believed in political correctness were supposed to think it meant. I still don’t know because I’ve never seen it used anywhere else.
Maybe it’s because I’m in Canada and there’s a difference in the way PC is marketed here, or maybe it’s a generational thing, or both, but… *What* liberals and respectable conservatives talk about a “race problem”?
#8 by The Dude on 02/14/2009 - 12:13 pm
“Heretic”,if you were in a foxhole and a grenade was tossed into it, would you:
1)Think to yourself, “I wonder if the guy who threw it was a “lefty or a righty”? or
2)Think to yourself, “Run”!. My point is don’t over analyze the mantra, utilize it.
Not many Jews or Blacks go against their own people (not in mass anyway, just think of Colin Powell). They don’t question Pro-Black or Pro-Jew ideology, only white people do (I think irrational white guilt is the culprit).
As far as “which specific” liberal or respectable conservative talks about a “race” problem, think in general terms and programs being thrust upon our people. Don’t lose the forest through the trees. Okay?
#9 by heretic on 02/14/2009 - 8:46 pm
Sorry, I was using one of the quotes of the Mantra that says “Liberals and respectable conservatives say there is this race problem…” (I can’t remember where I read that one) because I think it’s better than saying “‘Everybody’ says there is this race problem”. The fallacy of using the mysterious entity known as “Everybody” to make my arguments for me isn’t a pit I want to fall into. After all, “Everybody” knows there’s no such thing as race.
Don’t worry, by now I’m far past the point where it’s a huge revelation to me that what is happening to my race is genocide. But all the “analysis” that’s required for me to know whether Bob’s mantra as is is a useful weapon for me is the simple test of whether or not it is a true statement. Coming from me, or directed to me, it is not an accurate description of reality. I never heard anyone, from my clever conservative Jewish psychology professor, to my lesbian English teacher known for showing up to class in a slug costume due to her fascination with hermaphroditic sex, use the term “race problem” to justify my people’s destruction.
I am aware that Bob’s Mantra is not easily beaten in the contexts of the realities of the audiences it has been tested on. But it fails my test because to me it’s not true.
If I were an anti-White, I would simply tell you that I haven’t heard anyone but Malcolm X, Norman Mailer, and Bob (who I *would in that case* argue are all relics from another time; no offense of course) talk about a “race problem”, so the advocates of White genocide you are referring to are imaginary.
Don’t get me wrong. I think that one of the reasons this “race problem” term has died as much as it has (I never see it used nowadays without googling it) is because of Bob’s mantra. (I think that Bob is a brilliant propagandist and that’s why I’m here to learn). But I mostly think it fell out of favour (In Canada we spell favour with a “u”) with our enemies because at it’s most basic level it acknowledges that race exists. At the time when the term “the race problem” was a popular term, the meme that “race does not exist” would still have been considered ludicrous. Even the stupidest red sock puppet isn’t going to say “We have to deal with this ‘race problem’ because race does not exist”.
The language had to evolve with the religion. In my time and place, “embracing diversity”, and “institutionalised racism” were some terms I was unsuccessfully brainwashed with. “Tolerance” was falling out of favour (I almost never see it now either), I suppose because “tolerating” our dispossesion allows for the premise that we wouldn’t want it. “Social Justice” was gaining popularity as the struggle to justify affirmative action went on; not sure where that one is now as they’re learning to avoid that issue.
Perhaps this term “race problem” is still used in everyday conversation in the South USA. I am open to correction here, but I suspect that the audiences with which the Mantra works so well, are folks from a time and place where that term was (still is?) commonly used… Vdare for example?
#10 by BoardAd on 02/14/2009 - 11:24 pm
Heretic,
Culturally, YES, diffrences exist in the language used to genocide us.
You seem like an intelligent fellow and I sense that giving you a slate of answers wouldn’t satisify your mind. Instead, I offer advice.
We have a search bar avaliable just under “recent comments” on the sidebar. All you need to do is insert a keyword and the archives of the blog are at your fingertips.
As with most things concerning the mantra, the answers to the questions you seek were hashed out sometime in 2005-07.
Another great refrence for the mantra, is http://www.nationalsalvation.net
Welcome to the seminar! I hope that you stick around. If you need anything else, do not hesitate to ask, I will be happy to help.
#11 by Simmons on 02/15/2009 - 12:31 am
Well this is simple it seems Heretic’s race is dead. PC having gone so far as to erase the white race from the books, but I would bet the other races still count. Of course this is a complete figment of the imagination, race is there it is all that matters in the end you survive or die.
Heretic simply lives by the rules, PC says that whites are dead and they are dead no questions asked. Questions or the religion of PC take your choice.
#12 by Simmons on 02/15/2009 - 12:35 am
At the top of the page click on “White Mantra” it is a rewrite and for your use it might help. Good luck
#13 by heretic on 02/15/2009 - 4:04 am
Hi Dude;
It took me a long time to find, but this has in fact been covered before.
http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/2006/11/01/duhh-or-for-real/
Nationalsalvation was put together by Dave, right? I actually read almost everything in it before I started posting. It’s hard to get in on the conversation here without being familiar with the prominent memes, and I’m not here to expect everyone to explain everything to me from the beginning. I do not spend that much of my attention lightly at this very busy point in my life so I thank you for welcoming me and I do hope to stick around.
My point is there’s a reason that I can’t just start parroting the mantra in it’s exact words (and I certainly do understand how critical one little word can be). I don’t have some overwhelming need to word it my own way to sound smart. Simply put, if I said it word for word it wouldn’t be truthful, and I am not full of crap.
Besides, I don’t see my enemies talking about a “race problem”, but I do see them advocating my race’s genocide and I don’t want to let them off the hook. My enemies use more… “evolved” politically correct language. No one who is supposed to be supporting the party line could get away with implying there is a “problem” with “race” here.
#14 by shari on 02/15/2009 - 9:05 am
Anti-racism really IS just anti-white. Why is it Africa for Africans, Asia for Asians, White countries for EVERYBODY? I have repeated these two things over and over. It’s obvious this is happening.