According to a link in Swarm, the Occidental Observer had an article on white genocide!!!

Though such a respectable publication won’t touch such a Whitaker topic, as always, the response was solidly positive.

The negative response was FUNNY!

The writers solemnly discussed the proposition that the term “race problem” was wrong. They said not a word about the simple proposition that immigration and assimilation are required in ALL white countries and ONLY white countries.

This is the only kind of “answer” the Mantra ever gets from anybody.

A while back I saw a You Tube by a guy who was going to demolish the Mantra and he read it off his screen.

Well, PART of it. He apparently hadn’t read it closely before, and he kept skipping sections.

His main argument was about the statement that the Netherlands and Belgium are as crowded as Japan or Taiwan. Finally he found something he could attack.

He spent the longest part of the show discussing the meaning of the word “crowded.”

Sometimes you really have to have a sense of humor.

Just at the time I was at the Young Republican Leadership Conference in DC in early, 1962, the talk all over was that t William Buckley was to be a guest on the Jack Paar show.

This was unheard of. Conservatives were blacked out. Every “discussion” show about politics on every network had two Eastern liberal Republicans and two Eastern liberal Democrats.

The Fairness Doctrine went on vacation during the 1964 Goldwater election.

But then an evolution began. Faced with an audience which was overwhelmingly conservative the media began to put on a few token conservatives. It sold, so they began to invite very selected ones back, the ones who made them look good.

This looks exactly like a conspiracy. It was the opposite: At the beginning the networks had no intention of inviting ANY conservatives to ANY show twice. But they enjoyed the ones like Buckley or George Will who would share big words with them and assure them that they dreamed their daughters would marry people like these Wonderful Liberals.

We now have a myth taken for granted, a myth called “the middle of the road.” The media found that, if they wanted to suppress discussion of any issue, all they had to do was to get Buckley or Will to agree with them. Then they would say, “Even George Will, the conservative commentator,” says that this should never be discussed.

It was a matter of simple evolution. Those conservatives who learned to say what they were needed to say at any time were published and invited as guests more and more.

Like all evolution, it is obvious once you say it.

Respectable conservatives have been evolving this way for fifty years.

Pat Buchanan is the last of the breed that ever had any real dedication to his principles. But he could never make dogcatcher because, in the end, he is a pathetic theologue. I was a friend of his, and not only could I tell him that, I DID tell him that.

But there is not a single conservative spokesman who makes his living in the trade who has not survived cutthroat competition in reading every signal the media sends out. It isn’t entirely accidental that the embarrassing business of a six year sentence for Holocaust Denial in Austria was totally ignored by the media, and then William Buckley was the only commentator to praise it.

No one TOLD Buckley to do that. No one brought it up. But it was what the media needed at that moment, and Buckley had spent a lifetime competing to read what signal the conservative side of the two side myth, historical evolution required him to flash.

In the course of this seminar, I have emphasized that you must stick to discipline, stick to the Mantra.

New people who are actually trying this will routinely complain that I myself am not sticking to the Mantra because I bring in other points.

So far, my answer has been that these new people need to get in there and fight it out, and THEN they will LEARN where the other points are useful.

Now I think I can be more specific. This is what a seminar is for, thinking things out as you discuss them.

We face the same problems as any other outlawed group which is promoting revolutionary thoughts. Most of our job is raiding, that is, conspiring to give the Mantra maximum exposure before the censors discover us and block us off. This is exciting and promising work, and, for the few who DO it, it can be fun. It is the essence of grassroots revolution.

In these raids we are very lucky to just get the Mantra IN. The simple fact that we have now gotten to the point where even mentioning that immigration and assimilation are required ONLY for white countries and for ALL white countries is inevitably and unapologetically BANNED tells us how sick thinking has gotten and the odds we are fighting against.

But there are other discussions we get into. Usually any discussion with us on any site leads to a complete ban on any further discussion, but such discussions do take place. In those cases you may need more than the Mantra until the discussion is banned. In these case my lifetime of experience fighting this out comes in handy.

But remember, you are NEVER trying to convince the Wordist who is “debating” you. Your discussion is ALWAYS aimed at those who are following the discussion.

You repeat the Mantra regularly, but at the same time you can make other points.

The time will come when SOME ONE on the other side will have to take us on publicly. At present, everyone from the Communist Party to the National Renaissance group simply bans the Mantra, tosses it into the Memory Hole. If NRA doesn’t like the company I just put them in, they should leave it.

I will never forget the shock that hit the Reagan supporters in 1981 then they were suddenly in power. They had done a bang-up job of criticizing and finally unseating the moderate Republicans who had owned the Party through 1977 and, suddenly, they unseated the actual Government of liberals!

They had no idea what to do next.

So my over four thousands articles here, besides giving you ammunition for times when the despots are asleep and giving you a temporary chance to DISCUSS white genocide, also consist of a background for the next stage, when we get more exposure, when we have more decisions to make, and, above and before all, the time when we begin to be allowed to speak.

We must keep in mind that our present discipline is forced on us by pure, unapologetic tyranny. Like all underground movements against blatant tyranny, we must refrain from trying to introduce sanity and simply concentrate for now on getting our word out, despite the Thought Police.

But the whole effort is to weaken the Thought Police power. So it follows that we must also be making preparations for the time when that solid front begins to crumble away.

And we must do all that HERE, because it is major strain to get the people on our side to even mention the Mantra, much less include them in future thinking.

When one tries to express any Mantra Thinking, the first thing one faces is the Simple Reality Problem.

For example, when it comes to gun control or other libertarian issues, the argument immediately jumps into “Well. There could be some nut that…”

The person saying this also demands that we have An Open Society. In this, libertarians, liberals, and all doctrinaires are united. All forms of Wordism agree that, if you just apply the Doctrine in a society, it will make it safe, bountiful, and all things good, no matter who “happens” to be IN that society.

But you can’t demand an open society and at the same time insist that there must be stringent laws because some nut might do something.

Permit holders have once and for all destroyed the illusion that guns are not safe in the hands of responsible citizens who have no costumes. The Memory Hole has totally swallowed up the flat declarations made by ALL gun control advocates that giving out gun permits would “lead to a bloodbath.”

You haven’t heard that crap mentioned ANYWHERE in sixteen years.

One documentary had a rather desperate stretch which gave me a laugh, though I am sure it completely went by the audience. It had one of the most desperate non sequitors I have ever seen. One scene stated that this guy had “filled out all the paperwork for a gun permit.”

The next cut was of him robbing the bank.

Any connection between the two was never mentioned. A law against carrying a gun is no problem for a bank robber. But the documentary makers were DESPERATE to show that one permit holder had actually committed a crime. Either getting that permit was part of brilliant means of avoiding the penalty for armed robbery or that non sequitur was brought in for a reason.

Respectable conservatives don’t like permits either. They never mention the “bloodbath” predictions.

That is because the simple reality demonstrated by permits is that, contrary to all Wordist doctrine, the stability of a society is not ensured by a Holy Constitution, or a Holy Church or a Universal set of Family Values.

The stability of a society depends entirely upon WHO makes that society up.

But once again the Simple Reality Problem pops up. It pops up because of tailgating.

I will point out that this whole talk about “some nut” is a total contradiction of the libertarian, liberal, and conservative shouts that THEIR set of words is all that matters, and an Open Society is fine as long as you have the right words.

But the Simple Truth Problem is that two minutes later no one will REMEMBER this point. They will be off on a Discussion comparing Ayn Rand and Igskov Diadec or somebody, involving lots and lots of Deep Wisdom and quotes popular in libservative comments.

But the point is that it doesn’t MATEER whether Diadec or Kwantovich had the most impressive quote.

The Simple Truth is the point. But the simple basic point is instantly forgotten.

A society that has a Simple Reality Problem has a reality problem, which is a polite way of saying it’s NUTS

Back around 1950 there was a movie, My Son, John, about a man whose mother found out he was a Communist.

The biggest publicity shot for it was a photograph from the scene where his mother was angelically on her knees with his hand on a Bible held by her, swearing to her that he was NOT a Communist.

Back then this was instantly funny, even to college graduates. Everybody knew that a Communist’s oath on a Bible means nothing, and the old lady was funny for being convinced by it.

Today, I do not think anyone would actually GET THE JOKE.

Yes, everybody KNOWS that Communists are atheists.

But for it to be FUNNY, that is, for the reaction to be a guffaw, everybody has to SEE that Communists are atheists. For humor, it has to be a gut reaction.

To me, the difference is that back then people SAW that Communists are real, practicing atheists. Today the reaction to that picture would probably be a thoughtful frown.