Dave comments,
“You have to focus peoples’ hearing by giving them cues to listen, and then say it concisely and quickly.
“If you do not do this, they haven’t heard. In our Internet age, it is just as important to do in written words as in said words.
“Nobody is going to understand if it isn’t simple. You only have a small chance of them hearing you regardless.
“The widespread ignorance of this principle is astounding. DD and JT are so ORDINARY. They work their pie holes entirely too much and don’t come to grips with the fact that nobody is listening.
“They are like the Austrian Economists who think people are going to understand when they talk about ‘heterogeneous capital.’ I remember looking it up realizing that I had descended into madness. Joining a nutbar cult is the easiest thing to do in our Mommy Professor world. That’s ‘The Cave.’
“The wonderful thing about Robert Whitaker is he is one of the few people alive that isn’t crazy.”
Thanks, Dave, I guess. Being declared sane in THIS world makes me a bit uneasy, but I get your point.
Actually, this particular observation has some very practical ramifications.
I made my living in Intelligence, in interrogation, in negotiation, on Capitol Hill committees and the like.
One of the greatest compliments I ever received was a staffer who quoted one of the witnesses who had just appeared before the Education and Labor Committee. The guy said, “Well, thank God WHITAKER wasn’t here.”
My special ability was the practical advice I give you here.
One of the things I keep preaching is Listen to the Silence. Don’t just jump on what they SAY. If you listen you can hear what they are avoiding, and that creeps the hell out of them.
A really good researcher, a really good questioner, a top debater has one characteristic you don’t notice until you get in here and PRACTICE.
It creeps them out:
You hear every single word they DON’T say.
#1 by dungeoneer on 12/18/2012 - 2:30 pm
Making them acknowledge the Silence gets my juices flowing (charming Americanism).
#2 by dungeoneer on 12/18/2012 - 10:49 pm
“They are like the Austrian Economists who think people are going to understand when they talk about ‘heterogeneous capital.’ I remember looking it up realizing that I had descended into madness. Joining a nutbar cult is the easiest thing to do in our Mommy Professor world. That’s ‘The Cave.’
I saw some of the fringe Leftists opposing austerity touting the “Basic income/Citizens Income” .I did a Google search and found the usual suspects praising it,so it must be a bad idea.
#3 by Jason on 12/19/2012 - 12:39 am
Sorry to mention this here, but is anyone else getting tons of programming gibberish on half the messages?
#4 by dungeoneer on 12/19/2012 - 1:27 am
Yes.
#5 by Jmcaul on 12/19/2012 - 12:47 am
Jason I’ve been seeing it for 2 or 3 days now.
As for creeping out antiwhites? The very thought really appeals to my sadistic side. Antiwhites SHOULD be creeped out on a regular basis!
#6 by dungeoneer on 12/19/2012 - 2:59 am
http://www.economist.com/blogs/analects/2012/07/online-censorship
“Teams at Harvard and the University of Hong Kong have been using new software that allows them to watch the censoring of posts on Chinese social-media sites more closely than before. And now they have started to release some of their key findings”
“Rebecca MacKinnon, the author of “Consent of the Networked: The Worldwide Struggle for Internet Freedom”, agrees. “The goal has never been total control. The goal is to keep the Chinese Communist Party in power,” she says. ”
“Censors beware: you are being watched”
From the comments:
“What gives me confidence when I read this article is that I observe, once again, that fighting against freedom or masses proves to be near impossible in the long run. Networks don’t change that, they make it ever more actual.
More on topic, that macro-analysis systems can observe the internet in real time isn’t surprising in itself, but what such tools enable us to do is full of possibilities. We are entering an era where hyper-communication obliges all facts, down to a one-line post on an obscure forum, to be knowable and remembered. That has deep epistemic consequences on “how we (can) view the world”. ”
xxxxxxxxxx
This Rebecca MacKinnon,author of “Consent of the Networked: The Worldwide Struggle for Internet Freedom” seems like a good person to discuss white geNOcide with.
http://www.amazon.com/Rebecca-MacKinnon/e/B005MJCH4Q/ref=ntt_dp_epwbk_0
#7 by Simmons on 12/19/2012 - 10:55 am
Sometimes when I hear or read the usual boilerplate I’ll ask, “do you believe that?” But then I’m just leading a moron down into the Rabbit hole of doom.
99% of humanity cannot think off the script, and the anti-white kids we skewer are certainly nothing but cultists who even fear to think.
You break them in front of an audience the anti-white cult loses its legitimacy. If you shriek your primal scream therapy of N&J at them you are part of the system, think DD and JT and the host of lessers.
#8 by Jason on 12/20/2012 - 2:04 am
Looking back over what Bob has done and written, as well as my own observations, it is imperative that we tell the story of how history really works. How social and political change really happens.
The people who make change happen don’t usually get credit for it. The ability to take credit for things is a skill all its own and for too long we’ve allowed Johnny-come-latelys with nice hairdos to walk away with the prizes. When the wrong type of people get away with taking credit , we mislead our children. It isn’t just a matter of vanity; it is a matter of teaching our children well.
Everyone knows the big names that hop onboard once a new direction is obvious. And sometimes they deserve recognition for their courage (George Washington). But they are not truly the drivers of change. If we are to fully protect our descendants, we must identify and communicate how change truly occurs.
#9 by Jmcaul on 12/24/2012 - 3:46 pm
Oh I MUST have some latent sadism in my DNA (either that or a VERY STRONG sense of JUSTICE) because when I read that line I got warm all over just PICTURING it! Which calls to mind the one time someone read my tarot (which I wasn’t thrilled about but went along with to humor them.) When they got to the ‘result’ they actually took a sharp breath and looked at me as though they were intimidated. My tarot card was JUSTICE.
I don’t know how much validity to ascribe to the tarot
but I’d say in the case of White Genocide it was accurate that day.