Search? Click Here
Join the BUGS Team! Post on the internet along with us to fight White Genocide!

Aid to Haiti

Posted by Bob on February 6th, 2010 under Coaching Session

Communism accomplished one thing that was truly unique. They managed the only white countries on earth that managed to live like third worlders. While Japan and Germany got from desperation to American living standards, Russia and China managed to remain completely stagnant. Today Communist Mozambique has managed a feat once thought impossible: they actually have a living standard as low as that of HAITI!

I believe The Comedians, with Richard Burton and Elizabeth Taylor was the only movie I have ever seen which actually showed third-world reality without the whole movie being devoted to showing the CIA or white men in coats and ties were responsible. The movie, even with Peter Ustinov and Alec Guinness, was a total box office flop.

No one noticed that Ethiopian children were starving, not because of white men in coats and ties, but because the ample food supplies being sent were blocked by Communists and stolen by locals.

The bottom line is that no one CARES about starving Ethiopian children or starving Haitians. If they did they would be raising hell about the Communist blockade of Ethiopia and about the stealing of children’s food locally, because you can’t do anything about it THERE as long as these things are in place.

But, just as Futurology has nothing to do with the future, Food for Children seldom has anything to do with starving children. They are not doing anything that happens THERE. The promoters are HERE, just as Futurology has no interest in the future, its job is to get publish NOW, to become famous NOW, to become Futurology Experts NOW.

As long as children keep starving in Ethiopia, you can raise huge amounts of money HERE. Those who blockade and steal the food keep the money-raisers in cash and get a lot of fame for those who want a fashionable cause to push.

Money is not the only, or even the main payoff starving black children provide. Jane Fonda talked about “starving children in upstate South Carolina.” She doesn’t even know what starvation IS. No one really criticizes her for this, because it makes no difference HERE. She is using the standard word “starvation” to push her political agenda and everybody knows it.

And no one CARES what it really is THERE.

Haiti is one of the very, very few countries on earth which has managed to routinely STARVE its children with no outside aid. As in Ethiopia no matter how much aid you pour in it is the LOCALS who will get their share before any of it gets to anybody poor.

In fact, when it comes to actual starvation, only pure imperialism can possibly work. And it is “imperialism” that the local authorities use to be sure THEY get the stuff first. It is a classic Catch-22: a country is going to have starving children if the locals are stupid, greedy, merciless and all the things you are not allowed to say about third world countries.

Compared to avoiding saying things you shouldn’t say, starving children mean nothing at all.

  1. #1 by backbaygrouch4 on 02/06/2010 - 8:48 am

    Any celebration of diversity by definition accepts that some will have differing levels of economic, political and social levels of attainment. To be at ease with Nature one must accept diversity and its consequences. It is insanity to endlessly try to force a square peg in to a round hole, especially in economics. Haiti for Haitians. Israel for Jews. America for White European Heritage Christians. It is pure racist intolerance to demand that Haitians become like Americans or that Americans die for Israel.

  2. #2 by shari on 02/06/2010 - 8:54 am

    “The tender mercies of the wicked are cruel.”

  3. #3 by BGLass on 02/06/2010 - 10:52 am

    Communism seems not to accomplish scarcity overnight, at any rate. There’s a slow, insidious withering on the vine, the –one by one– internal decision to not grow, not try, not produce, not bring forth, to decide to applaud the bringing forth of others, no matter how terrifying some product really looks. All the smiling. From a certain perspective, I guess it would be mostly about smiling and applauding. Punctuated by bowing and scraping and kneeling. For now, one can be trained for kneeling in church. But someday the presence of the Bible might be too dangerous, no matter how strangely it’s interpreted, even as a closed book in a darkening room where one is taught to kneel in some particularly effective way. That lesson learned, you might get to be one of the lucky ones who applauds perfectly and gets the expensive stuff first in your country, before the starving kids do.

  4. #4 by BGLass on 02/06/2010 - 12:04 pm

    And it just occurred to me: those applauders aside, the ones whose endless clapping might make them “grand administrators” in communism, where they dispense goods to the starving, in which case they can get first dibs on the stuff, the others (with any real drive structure left intact, who might be so Evil as to actually strive to get something), might be motivated by what psychology calls “Reaction Formation”– the defensive tactic where anger manifests as applauding ferociously. Like if you dislike Obama, you naturally LOVE his wife, and therefore her high approval ratings. Or how there could never be enough Haitian children to adopt—let us adopt more and more and more and more. And maybe someday somebody else will notice the madness. Then we will be able to have our own children again. Liberals always act out–in hopes that grownups will correct them.

  5. #5 by Dave on 02/06/2010 - 12:05 pm

    “Compared to avoiding saying things you shouldn’t say, starving children mean nothing at all.”

    What is and is not permitted to be said is the very essence of authority. This is as true today as it was 10,000 years ago.

    A corrupt authority can wrap itself in any Wordist wrap. It doesn’t matter what Wordist wrap is involved. Marxist doctrine for the past 150 years has worked fine, only because those with low IQs have no trouble understanding it. There is nothing special about Marxist doctrine per se. It just conveniently meets the requirement that stupid people can understand it with some history behind it.

    ANY PLAUSIBLE SOUNDING LIE WILL DO. A political hack doesn’t even need to repeat it with a straight face. It just needs to be repeated.

    Castro is an old time Caribbean tyrant. He is natural to people of color. He is to be expected within the endemic culture of slavery natural to the Caribbean. This is the same culture that exists throughout black Africa and has existed since the beginning of time.

    The arithmetic is simple: You have a bully and a gang of thugs. Anyone encountering them immediately understands that they must repeat the right words or get their heads bashed in.

    The bully and his thugs copy the formalisms of European governments and live in splendid luxury with imported goods their own people could never produce. To pay the foreign debts incurred to purchase these goods, they then send out tax collectors to wring everything out of the indigenous population that can be stolen, with the loot judiciously spread around just sufficient to prevent coup d’états.

    Then Mommy Professor tells white middle class kids that Castro is chic.

    In response, the kids then wear Che Guevara t-shirts on spring break hoping it will help lure loose chicks.

    That is the way it works.

  6. #6 by Simmons on 02/06/2010 - 1:23 pm

    We whites generally are “futurologists”, we have Bob who has been on the high horse warning of genocide of our genotype, and we have the feckless kids warning of AGW “send money” types.

    I think it is safe to say that we will have to deal with futurology for quite some time (more futurology do not send money).

    But what differentiates us from the Marxist herd is that we are willing to place ourselves under self introspection while the Marxist Murderers want to establish a priesthood and therefore consighning mankind to stagnations and misery.

  7. #7 by BGLass on 02/06/2010 - 2:14 pm

    Wow, Dave, that was brutal. One thing about the right words is that, in intensifying climates, they aren’t exactly enough, but have to be accompanied by looks: sometimes utterly empty and vague, as if one really doesn’t know any better, impossible to read; sometimes openly arch, otherwise you’d be quickly dispensed with as an idiot, for fear you really wouldn’t know what to say, just in case some crucial moment arose when reality threatened to enter the picture; at other times, grossly sycophantic unless you want that bullet.

You must be logged in to post a comment.