Our Iceland contingent had beaten some cleric into the ground with the Mantra, so all the cleric could say was that he would recommend whites marry any minority person they were in love with, which naturally reminds me of the French Bridge Law enforced under Louis XIV.
I happen to remember about it because when I came across it homeless people were sleeping under bridges by the thousand.
The French Bridge Law prohibited anyone from sleeping under a bridge. Physical punishment could be avoided by paying a fine, but for some reason no one who got caught sleeping under a bridge in 1700 chose to pay the fine, no matter how rich they were.
Why?
Unless you are as mentally embalmed as the cleric I mentioned above, you would say that the reason no one caught sleeping under a Bridge in 1700 paid a fine was because they had no money.
After all, the bridge law prohibited wealthy merchants fro sleeping under bridges.
It prohibited a Duke from sleeping under a bridge just as much as it prevented a serf from doing so.
So obviously the Bridge Law had no greater impact on poor people than on rich ones.
This is the kind of logic it requires to argue that white people have no more right to complain about assimilation in white majority countries than Chinese do assimilation in China, or Ugandans do to complain about assimilation in Uganda.
Our benumbed cleric simply cannot understand that assimilation in today’s white countries means an end to the white race, whereas total assimilation of all non-Orientals in China would make no difference at all to the existence or THEIR race.
That is the mentality it requires for one to say that whites have no reason to object to interracial marriage in white countries, or to further massive immigration into white countries.
END
#1 by backbaygrouch on 11/26/2011 - 3:12 pm
Bob’s reference to the Bridge Law got me wondering where I had heard that before. Think it was from Anatole France an author I read long, long time ago when his works were still on the now defunct Index. [If you are Catholic you will really enjoy Penquin Island. It rips to shreds some of our foibles.]
Meandering to an article at wikipedia I found it. There are several of his bon mots catalogued, the second of which is: “The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich and the poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.”
But the best is last and pertinent both to our task and the Mantra: “When a thing has been said and well said, have no scruple; take it and copy it.”
Always wondered where Bob got that idea.
#2 by c-bear on 11/26/2011 - 6:41 pm
I dealt with a similar situation when an anti-white’s reply was that I was free to have as many white babies as I want, to which my reply was simple:
“So your response to the charge of genocide is that whites have more babies?”
#3 by shari on 11/26/2011 - 7:28 pm
Anti-whites have always aimed at getting to white children, while saying “you are free”.
#4 by Creator on 11/27/2011 - 5:05 am
All is very quiet on the Icelandic front.
The anti-Whites are still active but their tactics have changed a bit. Difficult to confront them nowadays. 😀
Life is Good.