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

The Communist Label is Proven; the Nazi Label is Disproven

Posted by Bob on May 22nd, 2011 under Coaching Session

One main thing respectable conservatives get paid for is FORGETTING.

McCarthyism is a term seldom used today, but the fact is that everybody McCarthy called a Communist WAS a Communist.. When the USSR fell, the titanic KGB files were opened up. Even the ones Buckley denied were Communists turned out to be right there.

Our local liberal newspaper, it belongs to a chain, had a front page article announcing that Alger Hiss, the one Nixon caught, had NOT been found in the files.

Then he was.

Conservatives have long since stopped mentioning this. It is too embarrassing to liberals, and not being too embarrassing to liberals is what makes one respectable.


On the other hand, when German files were opened at the end of World War II, every newspaper in America would have welcomed word that people like Lindbergh were Nazi agents.

No way, Jose, Errol Flynn either.

We keep getting called Nazis, but the only claims that were ever PROVEN were that American leftists worked as freely with the Communists as the most fanatical McCarthyite would have claimed.

Lately highly redacted intelligence reports have shown that Ted Kennedy was working with the Reds on a number of fronts.

If you hold your breath until respectable conservatives even MENTION that you will suffocate.

Respectable conservatives are busy calling US Nazis.

It astonished me when the X-Files had Darren McGaven playing an old FBI agent who said “Of COURSE there were Communists in the State Department, HUNDREDS of them.” The whole episode turned on the fact that the reason they were NOT found out was because the Aliens didn’t want them to be!

This is a secret only kept by respectable conservatives.

In fact I once explained what happened to all the John Birch and McCarthyite Communists charges of the 1950s. In the 1960s, they went public. In the Radical Sixties, all the Communists came out and in anti-Vietnam rallies carried the Viet Cong banner.

You would have played hell before finding an America First rally in 1940 carrying a swastika.

Jane Fonda praised Communism as did the rest of the “anti-War” spokesmen.

There is a difference between being against the American entry into World War II and carrying a swastika in wartime. There is a difference between opposing an undeclared war and carrying the banner in American streets under which American soldiers are being killed.

But no respectable conservative will ever mention it.

  1. #1 by BGLass on 05/22/2011 - 9:35 am

    Right-wings never look at what they are getting out of the deal, “secondary gains,” tossed from carriages of “elites,” not just a few coins, and not the least of which is getting to be as moral as the lefters. They are not left– no, they are welfare statist, but profess not to like it, and they do it for the military (which unlike “social programs” is an important reason to collect taxes, very moral).

    Centralists, pro-secrecy, sychophants for elitists, pro-mega-welfare-state-tax-collections, pro open borders (whether to bring in more catholics from the south, or immigration for votes, (since incoming catholics assumed to be “conservative” values-wise), or for cheap labor, or also possible military recruits as exposed in “dream act”—or the endless uses the “right” has for south american brown folks);

    Isn’t that racist! If people south of the border were white, would the “right” come up with so many ways to USE them for its own myriad ends? Isn’t narcissistic usury of people supposed to be bad?

    But no american says, “For a right winger you sure do have a lot in common with communists ideology.”

  2. #2 by BGLass on 05/22/2011 - 10:00 am

    such things are maybe as silly as idea that “right” is “for family values.” the cheap labor on immigration, for instance, breaks up family, then they decry that and say “we must bring the rest of their family and lineage forever and ever, (therefore we are “for family” again), but then the american have to leave family area where settled for centuries to get work elsewhere, since their work is displaced, and THEIR families are broken… etc. who is more against family values than the “right?” as is sometimes said of them, “they want what they want.” So ALWAYS a matter of WHICH family values, (Which families they value OVER which other families.)

    In a more abundant, creative world, perhaps this could have been different. But creativity, innovation Class has no voice. So, in a Warfare-Welfare State, it is atmosphere of “scarce and dwindling resources” and therefore which family is valued over which family.

    In an atmosphere of scarcity (welfare state takerdom), then it is only about dispensing, so they just say which people they will “fund,” which family.

  3. #3 by Dave on 05/22/2011 - 10:09 am

    It is useful to see these ideological distortions as a generalized syndrome of social dereliction.

    Phrases such as the “masses are asses” really doesn’t do enough to surface the awful truth which is a generalized syndrome of the wholesale divorce of society from reality.

    The misdirection of attention and nonsensical motives are so widespread I sometimes think it is just a natural phenomenon, some sort of mass enervation or the dominion of senility – or something like that.

    The Castro regime pulled the usual third-world rule by kleptocrats gig, and never got called on it by using Marxist theology as a veil for their looting. It is really quite amazing when you think about it. The regime runs a bald-faced system of slavery and everybody points to it as an example of social progress. Meanwhile the regime owns everything and everybody and nobody mentions that Cuba is merely an ordinary old-time slave plantation wholly owned by the Castro’s.

    Makes me think that slavery is the way of the world. It is hard not to come to that conclusion.

    White America is wall-to-wall kooks immersed in eco-theology and that counts for the “serious” side of white society.

    It’s really just a big mass of affluent people with so-called “professional skills” without a clue as to what to do with themselves. Then on the non-affluent side of the street the big mass of people are just one pay check or food stamp debit card away from outright desperation and all these people also haven’t the slightest clue of what to do with themselves either – not one little itty bitty clue.

    That brings me around to the idea of how natural slavery is when the so-called “educated” segment of society cannot even contemplate that the eco-theology they are so obsessed with is in direct opposition to freedom, and the poor segment of society cannot come up with even the simplest ideas on how to escape their plight.

    And the Respectables never mention the mass-murder, mass enslavement, and mass subversion of Communism. Instead, and to the contrary, they are people desperately in favor of slavery as a matter of principle. This is what you need to get: THEY FAVOR SLAVERY AS A MATTER OF PRINCIPLE. This is also the position of the eco-theology of the mass of whites. Make no mistake: ECO-THEOLOGY IS THE ADVOCACY FOR SLAVERY AS A MATTER OF PRINCIPLE.

    That is what I see in our politicians Right and Left. They all desperately advocate for slavery. They love slavery. They adore slavery. Slavery is what they want above all else.

    That is why we have characters like Sarah Palin. She is a hysteric. Her policy is an advocacy for a frenzied approach for the achievement of slave society. But Mitt Romney is no different. It is also “slavery or bust” for the suave ex-Governor. But all the politicians are like that. They get together and collectively chant the promises of slavery. Their real disagreements are minor, just minor arguments about the quickest route to a more thoroughgoing enslavement of America. That they are all whack jobs without the slightest connection to reality is beside the point.

    It is that simple. It is also that simple for the mass of people. That’s because the last thing that the mass of people want is to be directly connected to reality and accordingly be forced to actually think anything through. It seems to me that most of them really and truly do prefer to be slaves. Just listen to the way they talk. You cannot escape that conclusion.

  4. #4 by BGLass on 05/22/2011 - 10:09 am

    When someone says they are “for family values,” one has to ask: WHICH families?

    In a Warfare-Welfare State, a tax collection based atmosphere of scarcity, WHICH families are you saying YOU choose over which?

    The answer for something s/a Fox lineup is obvious to the public, but others are less easy to call, so asking is necessary, maybe.

  5. #5 by BGLass on 05/22/2011 - 10:27 am

    Phrases such as the “masses are asses” really doesn’t do enough to surface the awful truth which is a generalized syndrome of the wholesale divorce of society from reality….

    Mass psychosis.

    Sometimes, imo, this disjuncture from reality seems a result of multiple subjugations. Repeatedly, ideas are split off from acceptable behaviors, or thoughts from feelings.

    Like how whites have been subjugated to anti-white policy, then try to grapple with this power over them (becoming some manner of wigger, sychophant, or “fighting back” in some “allowable” way, etc.— but whatever the case, it is a grappling with power over them.

    multiple split-consciousnesses like this are formed; this sort of thing is compounded and compounded.

    One solution they do is to become hyper-self-centered (focus on what you want and then things make better sense–so they can feel like an “integrated” person, with “integrity”). But such motivations have nothing to do with one’s actions or the implications of them.

    Many cannot even understand, not really, that their self-concept is NOT who they ARE.

    So a Political Correct person says “I am a Conservative!”

  6. #6 by Dave on 05/22/2011 - 11:37 am


    But what puts me into despair isn’t the “power over them” issue. THEY VOLUNTEER FOR IT.

    The successful abolition of the draft was a seminal event for the procurement of freedom. It was a huge step in the right direction for free society.

    Now soldiers come back mangled and nobody cares. This is how it should be and this is victory for freedom.

    But people don’t want freedom. The whole force of their real desires is in the opposite direction. Nobody has “power over them”. Enslavement is what they want. To me, that is obvious and our politics would not be what they really are if that were not true. When a person declares, “I am a Conservative”, what they really are declaring is their contempt for freedom and their determination not to be free.

    This is why the default situation is conflict. Robert Whitaker said, “I see a world divided forever”.

    That is profound. And it is the truth.

    The racial division and the whole situation lead to the death squad/welfare police state configuration that dominates in Latin and South America. This is what is actually developing in America.

    It’s really just a state of papered over chaos, covered-up violence, and universal pretending.

    That is where we are at now. There is nothing that transpires to magically end the situation. It just goes on and on and on endlessly.

  7. #7 by Creator on 05/22/2011 - 6:06 pm

    “But people don’t want freedom.” is exactly right, Dave.
    I think that many, subconsciously, think of freedom as being alone.
    They are very scared of being alone.
    If they “vote Big brother”, at least somebody is watching them.

  8. #8 by BGLass on 05/23/2011 - 9:23 am

    “… Nobody has “power over them”. Enslavement is what they want…”

    Idk. Hard to say what comes first, chicken or egg. Trillions are spent to produce conditions that will make them want to “be protected,” or whatever, even more than would normally occur. Freud’s great contribution lately, was talking about “drives” and how to manipulate them (and yes, this activity for control and the masses who fall all goes back to the dawn of time).

    Still, at any video store is a huge sampling, for instance, of “entertainments” that directly mirror the “news.” Eg: Disaster film. The “world” created (that people are shown they live in) is rife with disaster.

    People are afraid to die. They want protection. Even shaming people seems about death. They don’t want to “stick out,” be a “special case,” as that means envy, or being noticed, and could mean death, as they are herd animals. So trillions are put into fear and shame. Trillions saying they are immoral and horrid—then comes the dangling carrot: “you do this, vote for this, whatever, and that morality will be restored to you! You will be a VIP.”

    They don’t want to see through the most easy-to-spot manipulations— b/c that is to admit they are unprotected, in reality. So they watch more disaster films or the news (which rationalizes the protections)

    Look at the market in crime novels, disaster and shame shows, movies, “news” with the same message, show trials, etc.

    It’s a circle.

You must be logged in to post a comment.