We fight a constant battle against the term “anti.” It is not just a mistake, it is a blow for the other side.
Thousands of hours of experience have taught me that you call them anti-whites, and nothing else. There is all the difference in the world between whoever is listening REPEATEDLY hearing “anti” and his REPEATINGLY hearing anti-WHITE and hearing “anti-WHITE”
Ours is a battle where our precious supply of words is very, very limited. If there is one thing worse than wasting them it is setting them up so that the other side can use them against us.
One of our commenters said the white race was being “crowded out.” NEVER, NEVER, NEVER use that. It sounds like the Tea Party.
In order to keep their share of respectability, respectables NEVER criticize assimilation. Christian Singles advertises a mixed couple in its TV spots.
I wrote in some detail about how one of our movement pros had tried to be non-Whitaker and not to use “genocide.” He tried “displacement,” which is a synonym for “crowding out,” and he saw it didn’t work.
With both displacement and crowding out the implication is that if they will just settle down and marry us we can all get along together.
Assimilation, intermarriage, is the one thing neither liberals nor respectable conservatives will SCREAM if you attack. If you avoid it, things go a lot easier for you, because you are not fighting genocide.
It is going to take a lot of internal policing, inside our group and inside each of our minds, to avoid fatal slips like this.
If you see it, CALL it.
#1 by BGLass on 08/04/2011 - 8:29 am
The strangest idea— that doing “ethnic” (non-white) things is sophisticated, educated. Like bragging about attending an “ethnic” restaurant, (in reality at a strip mall with a predictable string of types of places), or an “ethnic” show, or church, or whatever. the critique that the “ethnic” stuff offered is truly inauthentic, will even worse, create the response to get even more “authentic” “ethnic” experience.
Lol, as all this used to be a sign of subjugation, of being conquered, of self-ceasing, military squashing, of having nothing of one’s own.
Choosing it seems to make it worse. Like the Irish, saying “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.” The subjugation is seen as english now always, never roman. Yet neither is really Irish, neither preserves Irish tradition and history, nor moves toward preservation of things most Irish, in the deepest depth. Just a proud choice of tithes over taxes. (Just like today’s u.s. elections; the proud ‘right’ or ‘left’)
Americans learn from that. Choosing “which” ethnicity is the posh-est for you, and makes you most sophisticated, still is still not you.
#2 by BGLass on 08/04/2011 - 8:36 am
— to clarify, for what is still Irish in essence, the roman just like the english, is just an experience in their overall sub-groups total life. –in the sense that many americans feel more connected to white south africa (as colonists, as colonists vilified, etc.) than they feel attachment to other “americans,” who identify as “immigrants” as they feel they are undergoing a similar conquest.
Much seems to break down over whether one’s white identification is more with the term colonist or immigrant, just these two things– and from that comes two different motivational setups and justifications, how people frame things.
anyway one’s cuts it, of course, anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.
#3 by BGLass on 08/04/2011 - 8:55 am
“Far right wing” is never once called out for just being a code hate term for white people. Never.
Obviously it cannot be an economic term, for it is applied
indiscriminately to everyone but the communists umbrella of socialists, liberals, etc— it applies to grass roots libertarians, true coroporatist/fascists, radical military police statists, etc…
So far right wing means nothing political or economical, only “white.” It has no meaning except “white.”
#4 by dungeoneer on 08/04/2011 - 1:02 pm
This “anti” business recently came up with one of our pro-white friends on Youtube.It was a joy to see the swarmsters pile in and inform this individual that his ineffectiveness was inexcusable.
“Anti-white to infinity”
“Anti-white is the cow with a million tits”
#5 by herrMajor on 08/04/2011 - 6:37 pm
“Anti-White is a cow with a million tits”
A perfect example of the metaphor of how many different ways you can use the Anti-White label, It should be given a copyright by Bob Whitaker it has done so much to make us so powerful in such a short time span and we can come up with many more like it.
My point In the subject matter of today is.
99% of the time you use The Anti-white label, they don’t know what you mean.
“ANTI-RACISM IS A CODE WORD FOR ANTI WHITE”
That is a phrase, a single word, almost a political slogan in itself like.
“WHITE PRIDE IS NOT A CRIME” is a slogan, and a damn good one too. Carrots for all.
The main objective here is not to put a label on them, that is PUTTING A STICKER OF ANTI-WHITE ON THEIR SHIRT, THEY CAN RIP THAT OFF EASILY WITH LEGALESE OR DOUBLE THINK.
BUT WHEN YOU SAY THAT ANTI-RACIST IS A CODE WORD FOR ANTI-WHITE, that is a BLOCKADE AND A MASSIVE METEOR COMING DOWN AND HITTING THEM. They can’t use mental or verbal agility to get around that. Remember, We are not labeling them, WE ARE BRANDING THEM FOR EVER AS A WHITE-GENOCIDE-SUPPORTER.
Saying someone is Anti-White is the Nana-nana-nana trick, but really telling them that they are trying to label you as a racist and then flipping that around as telling them they are anti-white is the real power of the statement and USING IT AS IT IS INTENDED AS ANTI-RACIST IS A CODE WORD FOR ANTI-WHITE is the real charge of its power.
USE IT TO YOUR ADVANTAGE.