War in a society is different from what we are fighting. There is a Geneva Convention-type atmosphere in a regular war in a regular society. Russians who surrendered in WWII starved to death in German camps, not because of the Germans, but, as Solzhenitsyn pointed out, because Stalin disclaimed all POW rights for Soviet soldiers who surrendered.
So Stalin treated German prisoners the way Confederates were treated at Camp Douglas, where a much higher percentage died than Yankees at Andersonville,. There was plenty of food up North, but the prisoners didn’t get it.
General Lee died regretting that he never saw what I am pointing out. Any conditions in war depend on both sides being a part of the same value system. Their loyalty to their side is mitigated by their common loyalty to a common race and culture.
General Lee died bitterly regretting his thinking that the Yankees he was fighting were the Yankees he had been with at West Point. He surrendered honorably, by that code, but he subjected the South to an enemy who denied the whole concept of HIS IDEA of honor.
But the Soviets and the Yankees were Wordists. They had no common ground with other white men, something Lee took for granted. Soviets were Wordists. They had no common ground with anyone who was not of their Faith.
The Founding Fathers were very aware of this difference. To them the Inquisition and the Calvinist burnings of heretics was recent. They watched the Hispanic world become a colored mass whose only concern was religion, not race. In their day the Inquisition was still a reality.
There is a very slippery slope here. Do not get the idea that the person talking to you is anything but an alien if he speaks in terms of “all people.” One who claims loyalty to Humanity is an entirely different animal.
This is a lot like dealing with the millions of actual psychopaths around us. As long as they are hemmed in by a society, they do a better job of acting normal than we do. So General Lee thought he was dealing with other white men who would deal with the people he was surrendering accordingly.
When I was negotiating air deals with Communists, they were a bit comical, drinking straight vodka with bananas and stealing pencils from the negotiating room. But they were the same people who shot anyone who tried to escape the countries they owned and considered torture a routine assignment.
Wordists remind me of Asimov’s definition of robotic thinking, “Logical but not rational.”
This is a warning it will be almost impossible for you to remember when a Wordist “Christian” is simpering at you when it suits his purpose: “Trust me, I’m just like you.”
If a person cannot think, “He is a white person, I’m a white person.” you are not dealing with a person who recognizes any rules at all beyond what you can enforce right now. Something that belongs to everyone belongs to no one. In EXACTLY the same way, someone who belongs to All Mankind is part of NOTHING.
As with a psychopath, the Wordist does what he can get away with at the time. When you are e arguing with him, you think he is just too biased to keep this thinking straight.
His thinking IS straight. His only interest is his Wordism, which is always referred to by its code name, “Loyalty to Humanity.” The good of all mankind is his Word. His ideology or religion. There is nothing else there.
One who has loyalty can stick to the truth. The truth, after all, is something which affects him and those to whom he is loyal. But the person you cannot but think of but as looking like you and talking like you has only one loyalty, loyalty to his Truth.
He is a psychopath. You need to rethink all you normally assume about such people. Or you can make the same mistake a lot of women did about that nice Ted Bundy
#1 by Simmons on 07/02/2010 - 10:11 am
Jews play that shtick, “I’m just like you”, but its so obvious a psychopath ploy that it takes a mountains sized pill of PC for anyone to even remotely buy into it.
But that does not satisfy the jew and he/she goes even further into degradation to maintain his/her seperatness. (thank god)
Anyway people like that are boring to me, I simply cut to the chase and tell them their wordism is boring and what I want to talk about is what they consider taboo.
Weeds em out 99.99% of the time, shuts em down, shuts em up and ensures my dominance.
#2 by Dave on 07/02/2010 - 10:36 am
In all of the guidance and instruction that has been provided by BUGS this post titled Wordism and Ted Bundy ranks among the most important.
It tells you the character of the real enemy, and cautions you about how to respond.
If Nick Griffen and the BNP truly understood this simple and powerful issue, they would not make the strategic and tactical blunders they make. They would not drift off, for example, in counterproductive focuses on Islam, igniting hard to defend attacks by the very militant Wordists they should be discrediting.
You can immediately identify these Wordists by their strident self-righteousness. You don’t want these people to see you coming. You don’t want to give them any opening whatsoever.
If our people understood this clearly, we would be much more effective in choosing methods. We cannot allow our need to relieve very justifiable feelings about the blatant depredations against our people to guide our approach. Discipline is required. Adherence to method is required.
The problem is that these morally stuffed up Wordists are often perceived as being enemies of the Establishment similar to us, when in fact they are merely bullies looking for opportunity. They are the kinds of people that latch onto anything that promotes them in the eyes of others. Anything will do. And self-promotion is the only loyalty they have.
I can identify these people in a heartbeat. They are born infiltrators. They are often people possessed of great self-confidence and impressive personal bearing.
Beware.
Be effective.
Do what works.
#3 by Simmons on 07/02/2010 - 11:00 am
I must say in our little circles from the periphery of respectability to the WNs we see those as Dave describes, self important bullies.
Today our Semis never actually challenge the authority of the Mommy Profs (why should they, they want a Ivy League make work job as well), but they control their little groups with just as savage in group/out group tactics as anywhere. AmRen myopia and censorship, the Confederate re-enactor cults of Col. Bobby and little Jim Jones of the catholic right Tommy Boy Fleming are as fine examples of low ranking bullies here in America.
The anti-white “anti-racist” cult rules the roost, but these capos I just described control the controlled opposition and they are ruthless in keeping the weapon word “racist” as sacrosanct and only allowing vetted wordism as acceptable.
To lift the weapon word “racist” off the oppressed white man’s back would shear the cult leaders above of any authority the anti-whites have bestowed upon them.
Imagine millions of free white men and women flipping a bird to the blank slate cult and their conspirators on the Right?
The above is abstract hooey, here is a real world example; Have you ever been bullied by a bully trying to use the authority of a yet bigger bully?
#4 by Lord Nelson on 07/02/2010 - 1:13 pm
Maybe the BNP are finally getting the message. If you read the last part of this artical they quote the Geniva convention on Genocide:
http://bnp.org.uk/news/cockneys-become-first-victims-immigration-invasion-genocide
#5 by Simmons on 07/02/2010 - 2:44 pm
LN all I got to say is wow, what a game changer even if it starts out as tiny pebbles at the top of the mountain.
Maybe in the same vein the BNP will ask rhetorically, “Who is going to protect the British from Trevor Phillips.”
Hope Bob puts down the remote and clicks on your link.
#6 by backbaygrouch on 07/02/2010 - 6:05 pm
“The Founding Fathers…watched the Hispanic world become a colored mass whose only concern was religion, not race.” If they did their perception was profoundly in error.
The Spanish at that time had a great appreciation of racial purity and it has endured. To enter Spain’s military academy young Francisco Franco had to provide evidence of four quarterings of pure Spanish blood. Up until the time of Brown v The Board of Education a Negro could not spend the night in San Jose, Costa Rica. In the Spanish colonies there were elaborate classifications of the various mixtures between three races.
White Spaniards faced a different environment than did Englishmen in the New World. They conquered well populated areas and were always distinctly a minority. Our ancestors settled in a sparsely peopled area and were always a majority. Their biggest political divide was between Peninsulares [born in the mother land] and Creoles [American born]. Both were White and united against the majority whereas the Yankee WASPS have sided with Blacks against Southern Whites.
White Hispanics have done very well in maintaining dominance in Latin America. We would do well to understand their predicament and study their tactics because, if demographic trends continue, our new problem is going to be their five hundred year experience. We have a lot to learn. They have a lot to share. And it boils down to racial identification and solidarity. Most White Latin Americans know and live what Bugsters are trying to teach.
#7 by shari on 07/03/2010 - 2:23 pm
I don’t want to get off track, but why are Mexican elites, who are ,truly Hispanic, so anxious to assist genociding us, who are English and German, north of the border? Are they, no longer what they were either?
#8 by backbaygrouch on 07/03/2010 - 9:26 pm
To Shari.
The Mexican elite is likely indifferent to the fate of the White norteamericanos. They appreciate the safety valve of an open border. It makes their policy of White domination in Mexico easier. As for the radical La Raza agenda, that is mostly Jew inspired, lefty, homegrown nonsense. It is a domestic issue here. In the main it does not emanate from Mexico and certainly not from their elite as a matter of policy.
To the extent that it does it could be shut down in a matter of hours by the CIA. An offshore radio station or two promoting Mayan separatism in the Yucatan or similar sentiments in the northern states of Mexico should do the trick.
Remember, Mexico is not an ethnic national state. It descends from a transnational empire, a viceroyalty of Spain, delineated for administrative purposes in Madrid. The Creoles seized power c. 1820 and have never relinquished it.
#9 by Alan B on 07/04/2010 - 12:15 am
Looks can be deceiving. Those who wish to harm you may defy the typical stereotype we come to expect from a psycopath or a goul. Forget about looks and listen to the message, use your common sense, your gut instinct when asked to accept that which is beyond reason.