One commenter said, joking, “It’s lonely at the top, isn’t it, Bob?”
As usual, I smiled, but then I processed the SUBTEXT of that remark.
Strictly speaking, the LAST thing that a person at the top will be is LONELY. One of his major expenses is hiring people to keep people from reaching him. That led me to what a BUGS commenter would see as the Top.
I am at the top of the IDEA CHAIN. That is VERY lonely indeed.
It is SUCH a relief to finally see you doing what I have done through the years. You who are in there in the fight see things that by now you take for granted. On good example is commenters noticing the term “anti-white.” That is a DIRECT connection to US, but who but a BUGSER would know that?
Someone could say that the term “anti-white” was used regularly against Louis Farrakhan and other black separatists. But that is totally untrue.
You can read the old statements until your eyes drop out, and you will NEVER find any statement about someone being anti-white. In every single case, it was “Anti-White and Anti-Semitic,” and the reaction had nothing to do with the anti-white part.
Now even O’REILLY has had a clip with a black raving about how he hates ALL whites, without a mention of the Jewaholic’s Drug of Choice.
No one needs to EXPLAIN why it is important that Don Black referred to the SPLC as “Anti-whites claiming to be anti-racists.”
But you can imagine how impossible it has always been for me to explain how I could tell from the wording that it was MY logic the writer was using. What added to the difficulty was that I found that there was a complete inverse relationship between how my idea spread and its being connected with my name.
A LOT of my thinking comes from the fact that national columnists and their friends read or heard quotes from Whitaker Online and were given points for original thought. Derek Black said this outright when he told me up front that he had tried every way he could imagine to avoid the word “genocide.’
The point here is, Derek did not have to explain what he meant. You do not have to explain what you mean when you quote the exact phrase that can only have come from us.
This is why my entire concentration was on points and words that no one else considered novel. It is LOT different for Derek to tell me that or for you to quote “anti-white” than it would be if you were the ONLY person who worked with that connection.
I honestly believe that a major reason that the Space Telescope is up and the Soviet Union is down is due to a strategy I could not even explain to someone on the outside.
It was VERY lonely.
It is such a relief to have you here!
#1 by six gun on 05/30/2012 - 8:22 am
I increasingly come across people who are making videos and posting comments who are not “in” BUGS. They relentlessly pound out the message but they are acting alone or what may be a satellite community. I know this b/c I have messaged a fair number asking if they are BUGsters. I nearly always get a no but of course they know exactly what I mean. We speak the same language.
I see mutations of the Mantra. The message is the same but they have adopted a few different words to meet their needs.
The message can clearly be traced back to here to its original form.
#2 by Harumphty Dumpty on 05/30/2012 - 10:04 am
I have a friend who has been a very strong white poster for years, doing it her own way, the usual way, but strongly.
But now she loves bugs stuff, and copied the Tim Wise thread (which I missed, damn it) which blew her mind, and she uses the bugser comments on it almost as a bible she says, which has greatly strengthened her own style. She raves about some of the individual posts some of you did on that thread, and how effectively she’s used some of them. I”ve never met anyone, bugser or non-bugser, who was more excited about what we are doing and how it’s helped her own effectiveness than she is, even though she’s not exactly a bugser. I’m observing her “strange” way of getting into this stuff with fascination! She’s getting it, and already gets some of it better than I do, but has to get it all her own way through her own process.
#3 by Harumphty Dumpty on 05/30/2012 - 10:54 am
Perhaps it’s not saying too much that she’s the lady who wrote the recent Amren feature article “White teacher in L.A. schools” (something like that), which got a huge response, and was also referred to in an article by Kevin MacDonald, who is also very BUGS friendly.
The message spreads.
#4 by Harumphty Dumpty on 05/30/2012 - 9:53 am
Bob, I’m glad that some of what we do provides some comfort.
In your comment last night on the working thread, admonishing us to avoid the term “race mixing” since it’s the enemy’s language, my understanding is that the term was actually the term of the white resistance, and acquired a negative odor from that fact which the enemy exploited, and that in that respect it is language that is of (service to) the enemy.
I’ve been sick and have some medications in me this morning, which often gets me in trouble…I hope that won’t be the case in this post.
#5 by OldBlighty on 05/30/2012 - 10:26 am
HD,
Bob is not objecting to its lack of respectability. He is objecting that it is not accurate and worse, it does not make our point.
Nobody is saying Africa must have diversity. Nobody is saying Asia must have diversity. They are only saying all white countries and only white countries, must have diversity.
It is not race mixing, it is white mixing.
#6 by Harumphty Dumpty on 05/30/2012 - 10:40 am
Ah! Thanks!! I’m too fogged at the moment to see if my point has no weight at all, but I can certainly see that your point is the MAIN point!
I’ve been late coming to the understanding that the whole PC contrivance is about whites and whites only. Once thoroughly understood, it illuminates so many situations and indicates the correct reply.
This statement by Bob finally flicked the switch for me, though I still occasionally miss a cue, as with “race mixing” above.
The Mantra itself is simply noting that all that Love and Brotherhood and ”mixing of the races” has absolutely nothing to do with the ultimate fate of any race but the white one.–Bob
#7 by Genseric on 05/30/2012 - 10:58 am
It is not “white mixing.”
It is WHITE GENOCIDE. Good grief.
#8 by OldBlighty on 05/30/2012 - 12:00 pm
Yes, white genocide is more “in yer face”.
#9 by steadiness on 05/31/2012 - 3:35 am
it’s important to point out the code words people are used to ignoring. Anti-racism means anti-white. Diversity means the percentage of non-whites, multiculturalism means having non-whites. Race-mixing means white-mixing, because the only time anyone ever hears about how great it is and how everyone should do it is when whites are being mixed out of existence. As you point out, it’s also important to point out that all of these code words are in service of white genocide.
#10 by Genseric on 05/30/2012 - 10:47 am
Race to the top
“You can read the old statements until your eyes drop out, and you will NEVER find any statement about someone being anti-white. In every single case, it was “Anti-White and Anti-Semitic.” – Bob
I will take a shot at this one:
To take this a step further, it is important to note exactly what is done here when they attach the “and anti-Semitic” or any OTHER preferred smoke screen. They are effectively SILENCING the part that really matters. The anti-whites purposefully do this when the heat is turned up and they are FORCED to react to a problem. Double standards, market saturation, REPEATERS. Again, the aim here is to solve these by “marginalizing and sidelining.” Just like our very own little Jewaholics do to US from time to time by attaching things like “Jewish Bankers.” That is akin to someone in the board room suggesting Coca Cola CHANGE “The Pause That Refreshes.” Now that is I-N-S-A-N-E. I can honestly say that it’s a relief to be able to acknowledge my own mistakes and addictions such as these.
The Soviets’ major mistake was NOT successfully trivializing and marginalizing The Space Program. What they needed was a distraction, what they did was tailgate in the worst way imaginable. They bought it hook, line, and SINKER. “The U.S. Space Program is ‘revolutionary,’ but it is wasteful and meaningless. It is truly a REVOLUTION in wasteful government spending.” And the whole world can see that now.
We won’t let them sideline the Mantra and our message, nor will we let them strap it to some monkey’s ass and jettison it into the nether regions of outer space. Better yet, ours is a project financed without money. However, we will PUNISH the anti-Whites by taking their most beloved and prized possession; THEIRS.
#11 by Harumphty Dumpty on 05/30/2012 - 10:58 am
Oh Jeez, I completely forgot, one post per person per day per thread! I”m sorry! I”m out of here! Yow!
#12 by Southern Nationalist on 05/30/2012 - 6:48 pm
Coach Bob, I’ve been busy spreading the message of late but not sure where to put this. I recently spoke at a Southern nationalist gathering and gave the audience a lesson on getting on a consistent message (which they responded very well to):
http://southernnationalist.com/blog/2012/05/30/notes-from-statesboro-ga-speech/
I also posted an excerpt from one of your Porch Talks on the problems with the Declaration of Independence (and by the way, all traditionalist Southerners in the Antebellum age I have ever read essentially agreed with you) yet I got some push back on that. People so want to idolise the Declaration and believe in every word it says, unfortunately.
http://southernnationalist.com/blog/2012/05/30/problems-with-the-declaration-of-independence/
Anyhow, I’m new to BUGS but doing what I can. Curious where you think I can improve. I’m sure I made plenty of mistakes.
#13 by Jason on 06/01/2012 - 3:49 am
I appreciate the discussion of SUBTEXT. This is MUCH more important than most of us who are not communications experts realize. Please give more information on it. We see it all around, I am almost persuaded that subtext is more important than what is explicitly said, in most situations, particularly any form of mass persuasion.
#14 by Genseric on 06/02/2012 - 1:50 pm
The Sounds of Silence
I thought I might share a personal experience I had with a customer, as it relates to subtext.
The male half of a very well-to-do couple called me recently. He was extremely difficult to deal with during the entire sales and delivery process. Anyways, he wanted to let me know specifically that his WIFE “loved the new product.” Not him, but HER. The unspoken message with this backhanded compliment is he was still NOT “in love with it.”
You can apply stratagems such as this at any level. Practically political if you ask me.
#15 by Bob on 06/04/2012 - 12:07 pm
The One Reply Rule, like most else in BUGS, is being developed by practice. The point of the Rule was to stop people from just using an article to state their own view of the world in general and then come back and put in several entries as stuff occurred to them.
Most of us are SICK of that.
Our second replies are now part of the flow of discussion or answering other comments or even direct questions.
That’s fine. That’s part of a DISCUSSION, not wandering statements.
It’s called courtesy.