I just wrote a piece shouting that we are samizdat.

This poor argument about the Mantra that led to that piece relates intimately to another poor argument against the Mantra.

This argument says the Mantra had “already been addressed.” That is the signal that the liberals give respectable conservatives that it is time to back off something that is hitting too hard and they can’t deal with. Believe me, I have been there. THAT is the signal.

So respectable conservatives backed off from “If guns are banned, only criminals will have guns” by calling it “the old argument” that “If guns are banned, only criminals will have guns.”

That is the signal for any good Buckley conservative to back off that argument if he wants to get fed.

I said that, as samizdat, we are under no obligation to deal with any proposals by the other side until we are allowed to discuss ours as free citizens.

Note the words, “under no obligation.”

What this means is that if they talk about slavery or Nazism, our position that they have no right to talk about what we mean to do until we are allowed to discuss issues freely This Nazi stuff is EXACTLY like the Soviets who declared all samizdat to be fronts for fascism.

Samizdat did NOT spend its time denying it was fascist.

This “That has already been answered gambit” relates to another gambit they try. They argue that some non-white countries have a lot of immigration, to our complaining about ALL and ONLY white countries being REQUIRED to allow immigration is invalid.

Our point is that we do not have to answer any POLICY questions until we are allowed to discuss the PROBLEM and thugs and Thought Police acting against our discussion ends.

Non-white countries have the RIGHT to determine their OWN immigration policy without the solid front banning any criticism that white countries face.

I have recommended the money approach to punishing those who enforced the Party Line. This is policy I CHOOSE to discuss. We have the right to discuss what we CHOOSE to discuss, because we are banned from it in public, just as colored countries may CHOOSE how many immigrants they want.

But when the only reason for talking about policy is to show we have no right to DISCUSS it, we have the right to ignore these Party demands.