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

We Help Sell Tomes

Posted by Bob on March 22nd, 2010 under Coaching Session


When people found out I worked on the writing of legislation on Capitol Hill, they would naturally ask if I was a lawyer. I had a standard joke reply:

“No, I don’t do anything legal.”

“Uh-oh, let me restate that…”

Of course what I meant was that lawyers made sure that people like me discussed policy language in a bill. But, just as every speech one wrote for the congressmen began with MR. SPEAKER: certain places in the legislation had to conform to legal form.

Some of this was arcane. For example, Federal language used the word “abolishment” rather than the correct term “abolition.” The lawyer had to finalize the FORM, but when it came to 3 am compromises on intent and policy, the congressmen sent senior staff in, not lawyers.

So instead of trying to explain that, I just made the joke about my not doing anything legal.

But I face something of the same problem with my writing. I could say that the unique thing I have to offer is not factual information. If I say I do not base my thinking on a special set of facts I know, it sounds, like “doing nothing legal,” as if I were proposing that facts don’t matter.

On the contrary, my best work, like the Mantra, is based on solid actuality. But it is a different LOOK at actuality.

Having developed a way of thinking, I could spend another fifty years or so just looking into the facts you and I both know as a matter of course and finding different aspects to them that people need to think about.

I made huge factual errors in my first book that make me cringe now. But that book made Review of Reviews, and nobody mentioned one of them. Even my enemies realized that the examples I gave wrong were not basic. They were infinitely more interested in the fact that I was stealing the word “Populist” from the left.

But I cannot get all the research done by myself that people get paid to dedicate their lives to on the other side.

In his Foreword, Joe Sobran said that my last book was not really a book, even though he praised it handsomely. That is true, in the same sense that if I wrote a complete piece of legislation by myself, it probably would not be legislation. Lawyers have to do the doctoring, and most of my congressmen were lawyers themselves.

I got the discussion down and the lawyers did what needed to be done.

In exactly the same way, I have nothing but respect for those who study issues and then write our tomes. But a person who is only a member of the committee legal staff cannot make the POLITICAL decisions and do the POLICY exactness that was my job.

But the legal staff would be useless without us policy people. Policy is the point of the whole exercise.

This seems obvious, but it is hard for me to explain that the case of our tomes is similar. The problem with tomes on our side is that few people BUY them, much less READ them. One reason I gave up on conventions was because when I made this obvious point, I got that cow like look I so often make when I point something obvious out, something everybody already knows, as a prelude to saying what to do about it.

We cannot depend on the tomes to get a bigger audience for themselves. They have been coming out for a century and practically nobody HAPPENS to read a hundred thousand word book contradicting what he believes and is converted by it.

But every time we shake their tree with the Mantra, we set the groundwork for those who can see to look for more. People only start looking at “racist” literature when they are shaken by something they read, and damned few are going to just happen to read a hundred thousand words at the outset.

I understand the place of the Tome People. But they cannot understand OURS.

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail
  1. #1 by Simmons on 03/22/2010 - 9:48 am

    A long but worthy tome John de Nugent must be given credit for translating this fine work that is starting to make some headway with jewish question of taking us Aryans beyond the shrieking at the jews method that has failed.

    http://www.toqonline.com/2010/03/the-psychopathology-of-judaism-2/

    I post this here because this tome meshes perfectly with our Mantra, and I mean perfectly, at least skim this essay.

  2. #2 by Simmons on 03/22/2010 - 9:50 am

    http://www.toqonline.com/2010/03/the-psychopathology-of-judaism-2/

    This tome meshes perfectly with the Mantra, the word “genocide” is all over in this essay as we would use it. Highly recommended

  3. #3 by BGLass on 03/22/2010 - 10:40 am

    The post made me remember this: Growing up, I had only three tomes. Nietzsche’s The Anti-Christ, Reich’s The Murder of Christ, and The Bible. Everything else was p.c. (Judeo-centric, Afro-centric, Asia-centric, Chicano-centric, etc.) stories of how I appeared to “the other.” Then somebody gave me 1984 and Atlas Shrugged and they were ok, but not as good as the other three. Still, you could start to SEE how some tomes could un-reverse things. So that diseases precede health care, for instance, rather than health care creating diseases to cure and spending money to produce people who will have the self-identity of being diseased and in need of their cures. Otherwise, in “minority-majority,” you’d see white people on t.v. occasionally, like if there was a flood in Iowa. So white people did exist, and these t.v. whites were like the mantra—a simple fact. Connecting tomes to the mantra, so to speak, should not be so difficult, so I started to wonder why it was so hard for people to make stupid connections between things. As it turned out, we had enough tomes for large libraries; yet tomes do not comprise even a section of a bookstore in NY or LA, cities that promised to sell everything. Lol. Sometimes, I think the main thing that pisses whites off nowadays is the time wasted in forcing them to reinvent the wheel. Again. And again.

  4. #4 by Dave on 03/22/2010 - 10:41 am

    I was drawn to Robert Whitaker initially by reading The New Right Papers and A Plague on Both of Your Houses. I knew nothing about Robert Whitaker. I had simply found his books on Amazon.com.

    I was immediately pleased, for no other reason than the cadences and authenticity of the voice in which these books were written.

    An authentic voice is rare. Real writing is rare. I realized that Robert Whitaker was a truly educated person in the old fashioned sense, a rare find in today’s world.

    America used to have genuinely educated people. It was a marker of America as a nation. Now, this is exceedingly rare. I fear when Robert Whitaker dies the last man living who actually knows America’s real history will be gone.

    There was a time when there were great numbers of Americans who knew their real history. Today, the stuff PBS turns out on America’s history is appalling Orwellian crap, worse than anything Orwell ever imagined, yet the majority of our people believe it. It is horrible.

    The Mantra is an authentic voice, as real as it gets. The BUGSTERs are a unique group of people, responding to the authentic voice of Robert Whitaker, which means overall we are dealing with pretty high intelligence in this group.

    I always listen to the real underlying voice I hear. The voices at BUGS are extraordinarily authentic for a blog, people being Americans the way America used to be, when the standards were far higher than they are today.

    PBS speaks to granite stupidity. And it is in stupidity that the evil of nonwhite people are found.

    We cannot allow ourselves to succumb to the nonwhite standard; the nonwhites in their stupidity pull down white people. BUGS is resistance to this.

    Robert Whitaker is a resister and a holdout. We need to keep the resisting and holding out alive. We need to make sure that the white standard, the high standard of white America, does not go down the memory hole. The MSM uses all of its power to push that standard down the memory hole. We must never let them get away with it.

    So don’t think the New Right Papers and A Plague on Both of Your Houses and Why Johnny Can’t Think isn’t important. They are reminders of our traditional high standards and of our authentic voice, the very thing that is rapidly being completely lost.

  5. #5 by warweaver on 03/22/2010 - 12:46 pm

    I first came to whitakeronline via a link posted on stormfront.

    As soon as I came here I knew, instantly, that this was something new – something I hadn’t ever seen anywhere else. I’ve been coming back ever since.

    This is authentic. I come here because I LEARN on each visit.

    Perfect example: I read the entire essay posted by Simmons – devoured it, really.

    It pulled together a lot of things I suspected about jews, but never saw clearly. I learned a whole new way of looking and thinking about Jews.

    Par for the course. Thanks, BUGS.

  6. #6 by BGLass on 03/22/2010 - 1:40 pm

    That’s why memory is activism, imo. The struggle for it should not be so difficult, but people always re-state authentic things as Wordists things. Like, when I was a girl and would say I wanted a child, I would be told tons of stories of adoptions (Chinese, black, whatever). But what on earth was the connection between me saying I was going to have a baby and people telling me to go to China? For some time, I thought they were subtly saying there was something WRONG WITH ME, personally—so only a really needy baby should have to put up with me. I had no idea these adoptions were a cultural thing. People talk about “converting antis.” It’s better understood as an act of translation, though. Like from any other language. Like Mr. Whitaker suggests: not a matter of bringing them to our side, but understanding they see in another way.

  7. #7 by Simmons on 03/22/2010 - 2:33 pm

    I’ll try and keep this short and with paragraphs.

    I think I’m seeing some BUGs type thinking when I read the respectable conservative blogs on the issues that touch with race, and all the issues touch on race if one goes far enough.

    I wouldn’t be suprised if a respectable comes out and says before the next election that liberalism is thinly disguised anti-white bigotry.

    Of course Obama our ally will help this by plying the amnesty card which to the left is an excuse to play the anti-white card.

    Meaning I think the Mantra has diffused itself enough that modifications to the general thought process are being made with whites. BGlass might expound on this and with paragraphs.

You must be logged in to post a comment.