I just said that the blacks were almost certainly right that Obama’s win would have been far greater had he been white. That is heresy for conservatives, but am anti-liberal, not conservative. The only purpose “conservatives” have is to be a harmless opposition .
I’m not harmless. So let me agree with the liberals on another point they constantly make which every professional conservative denies:
It’s racial.
For National Review, True Western Civilization consists of a sterile pedophile in a dress shouting at the ceiling in a dead language. That is the kind of “opposition” the establishment thrives on.
In the broadest sense the opposition is as sterile as the establishment. Political Correctness offer us the future of an ant colony. Conservatives differ with them only in the nature of the ants they want.
Political Correctness sees a brown stagnant future where mankind, each one of which is a carbon emitter, will fit in with the stagnant environment.
National Review sees a future Latin America, where a racially mixed population concentrates on going to church and living according to the dictates of a sterile ruling class.
In both cases one’s society is dedicated to guilt. Young people can spend their lives trying to appease God for their Original Sin or they can spend their lives being sterile to keep down their carbon emissions. In both case they are Born in Sin and deserve less than nothing.
Liberals and conservatives insist that any other scenario smacks of Racism. They are perfectly correct. This all started with white self-hatred.
Once you learn self-hatred, it spreads to the rest of your thinking.
Conservatives now insist they are far more anti-white than liberals. They are certainly more DESPERATELY anti-white. They want all humans to be guilty of being human. Political Correctness rests on the same foundation.
#1 by Dave on 07/08/2009 - 6:13 pm
The role of the Establishment’s phony and unwholesome policy debate is to veil racketeering. And veil or no veil, racketeering is an inherently race based activity, shaping white identity through a process unimaginable to white nationalists.
People can tolerate stagnation as long as it is not accompanied by humiliation. Of course, that is impossible. Accordingly, self-hate is a burning fuse, a latent disdurbance in the structure of things.
But I am not saying that people cannot be and are not currently conditioned into self-hate as a standard of civility. Tyranny has long experience in doing just that.
#2 by Simmons on 07/09/2009 - 10:33 am
Great explanation Bob, very enlightening and thought provoking. What I found ironic about it though is that you came back to whites in your last paragraph, exactly what the establishment does as well. In a way they are as white supremacist as anyone ever has been, because it is always about whites, the FCCs are merely decoration for their “diverse” world.
The two groups you mention are wordist cults, a bit more extreme than the dictionary definition because they blend in a bit of sociopathic behavior. We could even be labled somewhat of a cult with our attachement to the Mantra, so you will understand if I get antsy and wander off point, it is because I loathe cults.
These two symbiotic cults are nothing, they survive on the semi-respectable’s shrieking for their shows of omnipotent fraud. All these frauds fall to the question, every darn time.
#3 by Simmons on 07/09/2009 - 12:03 pm
Africans are not told to self hate, Asians are not told to self hate, why is it that Whites are told to self hate by anti-racists? Are anti-racists just anti-white?
The nazi card is falling into our hand, but I suppose the Stormfront crowd is both trying to protect the sacred memory of Adolph and convince the “antis” how nice they are.
#4 by Dave on 07/09/2009 - 12:50 pm
Simmons,
BWs post is extraordinary and important, because it is again about the BASICS everybody forgets.
And what everybody forgets is that the tyrants we are up against carry out a political dialogue that in fact presents a unified front. The two parties agree that “We, the People” should only discuss what “We” OWE THEM and must sacrifice for THEM!
The hell with what we want and what we deserve. The only semantics that are permitted involve what THEY WANT and ARE OWED (according to them).
This is ancient. This is the ancient dialogue between an oppessor and the oppressed.
BW’s post is excellent guidance in practical politics. I hope Horus is paying attention.
#5 by Tim on 07/09/2009 - 8:44 pm
In my lifetime, Liberals have NEVER once admitted they were wrong on anything. EVER. This trait could prove useful for once.
The Liberals now have a clear opening to pull one of their classic maneuvers. They can become Environmental Nazis and say the brown masses are bad for the environment. We must limit the damage the brown masses do to the environment.
(Al Gore said something pretty damn close but I cannot find his exact quote about overpopulation)
The Liberals can make their environmental move against the NON’s (non is my new code word for non-whites). Just think of the slogan “Polar Bears or Turd Worlders? Coose or Loose.”
At the same time, the Liberals can immediately BLAME the So-Called Conservatives. They can accuse them of being anti-white for the last 50 years. They could then easily convince the country and the world that the Conservatives and their anti-white agenda have been to blame for all the harm done to White Children and the Environment this century.
The Conservatives would immediately start crying. “The Liberals got us again”
Hillary….Fuhrer for Life
Sam Francis called the Republicans “the stupid party” and the Democrats “the evil party”.
I am guessing Evil wins out over Stupid. If liberals like Hillary become outwardly racist like we know they are……they would kill the Republicans forever. It would work simply because the Republicans are THAT STUPID.