In General Comments 3 someone mentioned a reply they got to the Mantra: “Loyalty to the white race is treason to humanity.”
This is the motto of Noel Ignatiev’s group he calls Race Traitors. This is typical and funny. For an Ivy League Jew to be claiming he is a traitor to the white race is exactly like a Jesuit claiming he is a traitor to Protestantism.
Ignatiev, a small time teacher at Harvard, says “The goal of abolishing the white race is on its face so desirable that the only opposition could be from white supremacists.” While repeating the Jewish establishment line but for his present purposes he pretends to be bravely defying the white race which, for present purposes, he claims to be part of.
This is very typical. Anti-whites routinely hide behind being white as if there were no such thing as treason. As I have said, Jews are white or a minority or a separate group when it is convenient. Anyone who challenges their momentary identity is anaziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.
Anti-white whites will routinely be shocked by the Mantra, “How can I be anti-white? I’m white.”
My reply is, “It’s called treason, dum-dum, it happens all the time.”
Then I get out and some SFer gives a long, complicated reply which lets the anti-white get back into the debate. My stuff is designed to expose the enemy and leave them naked. The standard reply we learn from tomes gets them back into the argument. They have something to argue with.
In short, the Tome People do for anti-whites what respectable conservatives do for the left.
#1 by BGLass on 03/21/2010 - 9:56 am
I’ve found the “white” v “anti-white” terms problematical, exactly as you say. It’s linguistically awkward, but I often say “anti-white-gentiles,” or –and I laugh while doing this– “non-Jew, non-hispanic, non, non, non; you know the pasty-faced, white-type-whites, who killed all the indians…” etc. (And go into a sort of mantra I made up on this). Just to take out from under them the “I can’t be anti-white b/c I am white,” thing. To make very clear they are not “white like me.” Jews look white. Tim Wise looks white. Younger, more superficial people are looking at external reality, not loyalty and values. Ultimately, the anti-white influence (even if spoken by ethnic European) leads back to someone who is genuinely not identified as that. (Jews may not really be semites, lol, but that split consciousness is their own problem—not ours.) Now that Israel is in the bag, they’re writing books called “The Myth of the Jewish People,” etc. Guess they wouldn’t have written that 50 years ago.
#2 by Dave on 03/21/2010 - 1:15 pm
Ivy League nutbars don’t concern me at all.
It is headlines like today that concern me: “Tea Party apologizes to for racial comments directed at Lewis”
We are fighting a religion and a mentality.
This apology is a marker of no progress for us. It is a market that the Tea Party is actually an enemy force.
We will know when we are making progress and that is when the apologies stop.
Apologies are devastating to our cause. They are the very thing that needs to be stamped out.
In contrast, a nutbar like Ignatiev is just what the doctor ordered. We need more of his kind in the “opposition” for our real opposition is the apologizers in the Tea Party.
My resentment of the Tea Party is growing and growing.
#3 by Simmons on 03/21/2010 - 2:33 pm
The “tome” people are the trained reactionairies always on the defensive.
Yes you can win on the defensive if you have the offensive mindset. The Vietnamese had this mindset, they won. General Longstreet had this but Lee overrode his advice and in a gamble destroyed the confederate army.
The Mantra draws the radicals into a crossfire of withering fire that takes us from the defensive to the offensive.
Today I ask everyone to pray that the “radicals” pass their health care, we must destroy the reactionary mindset, the mindset that draws on compromise and lengthy tomes of IQ, crime stats and hiding behind wordist nonsense, and today could be the day that radicalizes the masses.
Go Nancy
#4 by shari on 03/21/2010 - 3:02 pm
Well, “be careful for nothing, but in everything…let your requests be known to God….” Ha! I think the anti-whites are trying to KEEP the tea partyers from going radical, but what is started is not going to be stopped. Not now!
#5 by BGLass on 03/21/2010 - 3:58 pm
That or engage the people who never had the reactionary mindset, to begin with, which is 40% of whites who don’t vote, some of whom are trying to get engaged and saying they are independent. Right now, it looks like 30% want the bill passed— so, It’s all about the ‘living document.’ Proof of dictatorship.
#6 by Dave on 03/21/2010 - 4:03 pm
Simmons,
The “radicals” are no threat to us.
The Confederacy’s defeat has nothing do to with anything between Longstreet and Lee.
The defeat was due to the fact that the Confederate Army itself refused to carry on the fight, a fight it could have carried on using the methods of asymmetric warfare. It chose NOT TO FIGHT.
A implacable foe cannot be defeated. The Tibetans can whine until the end of creation, but the fact of the matter is they allowed themselves to be conquered by the Han Chinese.
Like ourselves, they blame the “leaders” on the scene at the time of Han assualt in 1950. The fact of the matter is that they failed to fight.
It is any wonder that the Han have contempt for them?
Our true enemy resides with our own appeasers. Don’t for one minute think that Obamacare won’t be a real victory for the Marxists. It is as real as it gets.
If they pull it off, they will kick the Republicans, they will bloody them, and they will piss on them and the Republicans will shout impotent defiance in the pauses of begging for mercy.
That is the way defeat always happens. Once you have the defeated pretending they haven’t really been defeated, you have them right where you want them.
Robert Whitaker explained all of this perfectly: “Never lose a war”.
#7 by Wandrin on 03/21/2010 - 6:33 pm
“Then I get out and some SFer gives a long, complicated reply which lets the anti-white get back into the debate.”
The other side love verbal fencing because they are very good at it. Some of our side see it as a challenge to play that game and i understand that desire but ultimately it is intellectual vanity. When challenged to a verbal fencing match instead of a little fencing sword bring a flame thrower.
Always cheat.
Only word-fence fairly when you have a clear 10 point advantage*, otherwise use brawn** or cheat.
Even if you do have the ability to word-fence and win it’s often better to act as an example by providing the audience with simple talking points they can copy.
*Verbal IQ is a specific skill, don’t let a high general IQ lead you into getting tied up in word-knots.
**brawn in this context is repetitive, simple mantra-like statements – not arguing – just making a point – over and over and over and over and over and over. In some other contexts it can mean punching someone in the face. Either way, use brains against dumber people and brawn against clever ones.
#8 by warweaver on 03/21/2010 - 7:19 pm
I had the exact thought Simmons, upon reading that headline (though I read it on Google news page). I thought to myself: ‘you know, why would they permit themselves to be distracted by apologizing for some random comments made during the high water mark of a political protest.’
It wasn’t the issue, and yet that came to define what had occurred during those protests. By apologizing, the representatives of that protest permitted themselves to be saddled with responsibility for everything was thought and said (or unsaid) at their event – any adult instantly recognizes that they are not responsible for everything that is said and thought when thousands of people are protesting something.
I agree with your take on this entirely – we’ll know progress has been made when people stop apologizing for their loose connections to racial realists. We’ll know we’ve arrived when people stop apologizing for their own racial realism.
#9 by Dave on 03/21/2010 - 7:25 pm
Wandrin,
You just gave great advice.
The Mantra is about us, not about them.
This issue is OUR MILITANCY, nothing else.
I can win any argument by saying: “That is just YOUR opinion. Take your opinion and go to hell!”
Then if they try to respond, just shout them down.
#10 by Alan B on 03/21/2010 - 7:50 pm
The past often holds the key to events that occur in the present. Example, Obama and company have stated on record that the Tea Part membership is made up of racist and other extreemist wack jobs.
Ironicly, the Tea Party protest in Washington today was tainted when a few members shouted racist remarks at a black member of congress, the media demaded an appology and one was forth coming. How convienent.
My point in all this is this, these retards at the Tea Party were there to discredit the protest and tarnish the honest membership, it was staged! Other examples, when hate laws are on the adjenda, Jewish tombstones topple over and KKK graffity pops up over night. Maybe you remember the black teenage women found dazed and cover in crap, she claimed rape at the hands of a white gang, it was a hoax.
The Mantra does not require acts of vandalism or charges of rape to make a logical point. Whites are being exterminated by anti white hate and immigration, it is the real deal.
#11 by Gator61 on 03/21/2010 - 11:05 pm
One problem with word fencing on line, is it is impossible to to know who you are word fencing with.
I recall from my own word fencing days on SF getting into a debate over the USS Liberty, with a Jew who claimed to be a Navel Officer. I doubt that he had ever been in any branch the US military. Because he made that claim it gave his argument more weight. I having never served in the military had no way of coming with specific questions that would discredit him on that point.
I don’t want to rehash that whole debate, but the point is anyone on a message board or chat room or comments to a news paper article can claim any credentials they like and most people will take that claim at face value, especially if it bolsters what they have already been taught.
At 48 years old, I can go on line and claim I stormed the the beaches at Normandy, and led the Tuskegee Airman into Poland to liberate Auschwitz, and that’s why I know what America is all about and no one will challenge me.
#12 by Wandrin on 03/23/2010 - 12:34 am
@Gator61
I think there’s a lesson in that. Sometimes you can stumble and find yourself being outclassed. What i try to do in situations like that is break off straight away using some neutral excuse (like a phone call) as i think a loss has a more negative effect on the audience than a no-score draw.
It’s a good example of cheating as well.