I used HD’s comment as our latest article because it was an actual, honest-to-God ARTICLE.
Each of the people who takes the helm for me here at BUGS soon learns what the above sentence means. They deal with a number of people who do regular, self-motivated, disciplined work on their own, i.e., actual BUGSERS. So soon they begin to talk with BUGSERS about BUGSERS possible articles to take the pressure off Ole Bob.
Why does this so seldom work out?
Writing is simply DIFFERENT from debating on the net or commenting.
That is the reason I have so often mentioned talking with people who say, “I cannot understand it. I can talk about a concept perfectly, but I can’t write it down the way I want it.”
My reply was, “Can you fix a TV set (or now, a computer)?”
They reply, “Of course not,” while they quietly ruminate if I have at last lost the few marbles that remain to me.
I then try to explain to them that professional-level writing is like professional-level anything else: You don’t just DO it, you LEARN it.
Writing is no more talking on paper than portrait-painting is just doodling more carefully.
When I see a comment that amounts to an article, which is very, very seldom, I use it here if I can.
HD’s article was a very, very thoughtful critique of one of our very few heroes, David Duke.
I was more interested in the thinking and writing involved and how HD handled it than in what it says about Dr. Dave himself.
This writing reflects something BUGSERS have developed that I am very proud of: The very practical Art of Disagreement.
Our big advantage in this is that we are NOT Wordists.
With Wordists, disagreement has to turn into enmity because you judge a person entirely by what WORDS he is loyal to.
A person who will give his life for a set of words simply cannot be truly loyal to anyone who disagrees about the WORDS.
Our disagreements with Dr. Duke involve a matter of technique, not of loyalties.
All those millions of Only True Faiths that make up Wordism lead to the Religious Wars, Marxist dictatorships, theocratic despotisms, and wars that on a scale no national or racial interests could ever be considered sane.
Wordists say that, “If everybody would just agree on my One True Faith, and STAY agreed, we would have World Peace.”
My answer to that is thoroughly redneck and absolutely true: “If a bullfrog had wings he wouldn’t bump his butt every time he jumps.”
Dave said flatly that the Mantra does not WORK. HD and I disagree strongly.
But to pro-whites this is a matter of TECHNIQUE. We take it seriously, but we can debate it and keep our full respect for the one genuine celebrity pro-whites have.
#1 by ElectricWhiteRabbit on 06/07/2014 - 11:46 am
We are dangerous to wordist because we attack what they’d die for.
#2 by -backbaygrouch- on 06/07/2014 - 12:33 pm
From yesterdays’ Telegraph {London}:
“Argentina appoints new secretary of ‘national thought’
Cristina Kirchner appoints ‘national thought’ secretary, promoting criticism of the fascist overtones of the post…”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/argentina/10880243/Argentina-appoints-new-secretary-of-national-thought.html
Wordism incarnate.
#3 by Joe Bug on 06/07/2014 - 4:04 pm
The Mantra is the ONLY thing that works.
Obsessively calling the Jews “racist” for wanting to keep Israel for the Jews while preaching that “all races deserve a homeland for themselves”, is very ineffective and confusing. It seems, that type of perplexing message makes the average anti-White White even more anti-White.
The Mantra is the ONLY thing that works.
#4 by TheSeeker OfTruth on 06/07/2014 - 8:33 pm
Here in Birmingham we have few homegrown celebrities. One is Ronnie Merchant, he ran a furniture store for about thirty years and according to his advertisements he was ‘going out of business’ from day one. Another is Jim Skinner and his son Jimmy. They ran a Ford dealership here for about sixty years, Jimmy still does. They were famous for silly commercials ie they flew the USS Skinnerprise around teleporting high prices out of here. That is the kind of celebrity Duke is. A hunnert dollars says he’ll beat yer best deal regardless!
#5 by Daniel Genseric on 06/07/2014 - 10:49 pm
“Mantra No Workie.”
BWAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!! oh… sorry.
Even I was smart enough to realize the Mantra approach must be at least TRIED before dismissing it wholesale as inherently “flawed” or whatever.
So silly. Pssssst…… It really does work, but winning is A LOT OF WORK as there are just so damn many anti-white losers out there.
Enjoy.
#6 by Henry Davenport on 06/07/2014 - 11:14 pm
I was taught to write mainly by a Virginia highway engineer, Mr. Dillard, who taught our freshman Engineering English course that was intended to turn us into competent technical writers. One of the main things he had us do was read articles (I remember one was on the theory of evolution) and write abstracts of them. That is wonderful practice in organizing one’s points, deciding which points are main points and which are subsidiary, how they relate, etc. I’ve always felt very lucky I had him for a teacher. It was a grindingly hard course! No matter how well you wrote an assignment, there were excellent student graders who left comments on it showing you how you could have done it better. Reminds me of when I was learning to use the Mantra correctly here, come to think of it! 🙂
It’s helpful after writing a sentence or an article to read it over while imagining that you’re not the person who wrote it but are a random reader. Maybe we all do that when we write.
#7 by Horatio on 06/08/2014 - 10:11 pm
HD, thanks for that comment. It’s interesting that your clarity comes from an Engineering English course, sorta makes sense. I blunder more when I speak than when I write, yet I believe that when posting the mantra, brevity and clarity are of the essence.
#8 by AnotherOne on 06/08/2014 - 12:25 am
I first saw the Mantra, then I saw Duke next.
#9 by Yankee Rebel on 06/08/2014 - 6:32 am
I am grateful to Bob for writing this article. It helped me to better understand issues like wordism, disagreement over technique, and respect. There is always more to learn here which is one of the reasons I have kept coming back.
#10 by Simmons on 06/09/2014 - 9:49 am
You are wasting your time debating DD, but you can ask him this question exactly as I write it and then fun and frivolity shall ensue, “Mr. Duke what anti-white propaganda impresses you these days from a purely intellectual point of view?”
The word “propaganda” will trip him up since it denigrates his opposition which in turn diminishes his star as an intellectual.
Its like calling the New York pro-Soviet jews in the NYTs that Buckley debated, propagandists. Buckley’s whole shtick was some made up intellectualism which so impressed his leftist pro-soviet counterparts that they had to allow him a place on the stage out of shear intellectual fear of Buckley’s awesomeness or some other circular reasoning. And send National Review money and never call the USSR a prison ran by morons who called themselves intellectuals while your at it.
#11 by Daniel Genseric on 06/09/2014 - 5:37 pm
See, you already diminished his celebrity not more than two words in by calling him “Mr.” in lieu of “Dr.” For shame, Simmons. For shame.
Regarding your main point though, you’re right. This is what Bob calls the Evil Genius Conspiracy, or something like that, wherein anti-mantra pro-whites sit around in a Big Circle and talk about how magical Jewish Power & Influence is. I’ll admit it is impressive, but European Americans relinquished it. Therefore, it is ours to take back.
Pointing this fallacy out does more damage to his “star” than failing to acknowledge his Ukrainian doctoral certificate (I wonder if it was printed in Chernobyl).
#12 by Henry Davenport on 06/09/2014 - 2:05 pm
Until BUGS, White survival had no mass propaganda campaign. Pro-Whites assumed that the same painstaking, investigative process that insufficiently educated themselves (they almost never reached an understanding of White Genocide) would also educate other Whites, since the material could be presented in just 10 or 20 fact-packed volumes (or a hundred fact-packed videos) that the average White would be eager to absorb.
That the material would contradict everything that Whites had lately been taught would of course offer no hindrance.
Meanwhile, anti-whites continued to simply call anyone who fought for the survival and well-being of the White race a “racist,” a “hater,” and a “White supremacist.”
Over and over and over and over, until those ideas were imprinted in Whites’ minds.
It worked. It put anti-whites on the moral high ground and put ourselves in the moral swamp.
We at BUGS call the enemy “anti-whites” who are carrying out “White Genocide.”
Over and over and over and over, until that understanding is imprinted in Whites’ minds.
Our charge is true, and it works. It puts ourselves on the moral high ground and puts anti-whites in the moral swamp.
The old pro-white educational approach doesn’t retake the moral high ground.
Most importantly, it doesn’t imprint an understanding of White Genocide.
It doesn’t imprint much of anything, since it lacks technique to reach a sizable audience and to bypass the anti-whites’ conditioning of that audience.
#13 by Henry Davenport on 06/09/2014 - 4:17 pm
Redaction;
“The old educational approach of pro-Whites is defensive and doesn’t retake the moral high ground.”
#14 by Henry Davenport on 06/09/2014 - 6:11 pm
A few years ago I must have listened to a hundred hours of podcasts of the old radio show that Dr. Duke and Don Black did together, and it was an important part of my education.
Dr. Duke’s courage, hard work, and the education that he’s provided so many of us have my tremendous respect and admiration.
But all that has nothing to do with the fact that public discourse needs to be opened up to the fact of White Genocide and other White issues, and the old-timers haven’t found a way to do that and mostly don’t recognize a way when it’s put in front of them.
#15 by -frank- on 06/09/2014 - 9:41 pm
OT, but I can’t resist announcing a job well done by BUGS swarm:
—-
The SWARM makes its bones in fending off the anti-White attack on Ricardo Duchesne!
http://www.eurocanadian.ca/2014/06/kerry-jang-wants-to-curtail-academic.html
Scroll down about half way to see the (swarm) in action, causing CTV News to disable the comment thread. We’ve even got a WHOLE MANTRA showing up, with many minis.
In the blog linked above, Ricardo makes good use of the disabling of the comment stream to illustrate “the silence”.
Good Job SWARM!
#16 by Yankee Rebel on 06/10/2014 - 4:09 am
Thanks for that link, frank. I am glad to know such a thing as a Council of European Canadians exists. There were some great Mantra quotes in the comment section.
#17 by Jason on 06/10/2014 - 10:46 am
There are personal benefits to Mantra thinking and reading Bob’s site. For example, everyone I know is certain Hillary will win the nomination. Yet, I know that a 70 year old White woman is the last thing the People of Color (POC), who make up 50% of their party, want.
Maybe I am dreaming, but I suspect that when the GOP loses in 2016, it will most likely be to a POC heading the Dem ticket. That could finally force some thick White heads to admit the truth about the impact of these “demographic changes”.
I bet the White leaders of the Dems will be the most shocked. Some may try to become Neo-pro-Whites at some point. I believe Bob warned us about accepting them, for they are just like the NeoCons who came over to the conservative side when they couldn’t accomplish their goals on the Dem side, and then ruined conservatism in the process.
Don’t accept traitors. We are preparing the ground for a proper response to the genocide we’ve endured with all this Mantra work. Whites WILL want a new approach fairly soon, something many anti-Mantra Pro-Whites don’t get, and we need to give them a way to think about what’s happened to them.
They need to know it was genocide. Not a lack of faith, or a failure to assimilate new immigrants, or a lack of Tradition. No, it was genocide, straight up.
#18 by Asgardian on 06/11/2014 - 10:40 pm
In case anyone missed it whites seemed to have voted racially for the first time in a looooong time. The iindividuas name is Dave Brat who beat out GOP future speaker of the house David Cantor.
Brats main talking point I believe is NO AMNESTY.
Whites voted racially for their OWN interests.
This is kinda significant IMO.
#19 by Ice Knight on 06/12/2014 - 5:32 pm
Yes it looks like the US is starting to follow the same pattern as what has happened around Europe recently with the rise of FN, UKIP etc – like the GOP these are all ‘respectable conservative’ parties, but where they have used an explicit anti-immigration message we have seen the emergence of a White voting block.
I agree this is a hugely significant step, we just need to keep on pushing to ensure we get this block on our message and not that of ‘respectable conservatism’
#20 by Asgardian on 06/12/2014 - 8:03 pm
I agree we have to continue being strict in our discipline. Now is not the time to celebrate. We havent won the game we just put it into overtime. Just 2 enjoy it momentarily how cool is that though? Whites explicitly said NO to amnesty in a clear and loud voice. This guy ran on no amnesty and whites voted 4 him. The respectable pissed their pants when that happened. They lost control of the message big time.
#21 by Henry Davenport on 06/12/2014 - 8:50 pm
Yeah, it’s exciting. Don Black said he could imagine things changing very quickly, like someone walking into a room and turning on the lights.
Those Whites and the fact of White Genocide are headed for a meeting!
#22 by Jason on 06/12/2014 - 10:54 pm
I loved seeing Cantor lose, but remember, his challenger isn’t pro-White. We still have a long way to go. I still keep hoping that when the Dems win in 2016 with (I hope) a person of color, Whites will have a reaction like the Tea Party, except this time openly pro-White.
I may be dreaming, but the only way for it to come true is to keep pushing over the next several years.
#23 by Asgardian on 06/12/2014 - 11:08 pm
Correct Dave Brat is not prowhite, his “stance” however is no amnesty is very pro white. Whites didnt vote for him per say they voted for no amnesty. Which speaks volumes. These were diehard respectable lovers and the second some1 actually ran on no amnesty they voted 4 him wether he is full of shit is irrelevant…its what whitey voted 4 that counts.
#24 by Jason on 06/12/2014 - 9:03 pm
Yes please keep pushing our message, because the big threat in the future will be Whites getting sidetracked on some “Faith and Values” trip, or maybe “Law and Order” or Free Market Worship or some other form of Wordism.
We need them to be pro-White and specifically aware of White Genocide!
Whites voted big to limit benefits to illegals back in California in 1994 (prop 187). The courts just overturned it and the state is now non-White and will be forever. People can have these positive eruptions, but without guidance, it goes nowhere.
There are many YEARS of work to be done.
#25 by Henry Davenport on 06/13/2014 - 9:42 am
Exactly! We’ll have hit our stride when the phrases “anti-white” and “White Genocide” are heard as frequently as “white supremacist,” “hater,” and “racist.”
That day is down the road, but we’ve begun very well!
#26 by Jason on 06/12/2014 - 10:20 am
For Fun:
Pro-Russian separatists in Ukraine are using the Confederate flag as a symbol. Russians see it as a way to soften the American desire to interfere, at least among Southerners.
It is not out of the realm of possibility that Russia might someday point out our elites’ anti-White policies for their OWN propaganda purposes.
We can only hope.
http://reason.com/blog/2014/06/11/pro-russian-separatists-are-flying-the-c