Anti-whites base the history of technology on all mankind. The reason you have your computer is because All Mankind accumulated that knowledge and wrote it down.
The white man’s half-clothed barbarian ancestors discovered this accumulated knowledge and, as Newton put it, “I saw far because I was standing on the shoulders of giants.”
Please remember that Newton was justifying himself to a bunch of superstitious idiots who thought they were Intellectuals.
Sound familiar?
In Newton’s time, a speaker or writer was FINED for contradicting Galen in any way! Like saying you shouldn’t take pints of blood out of a pneumonia patient.
Such were the “giants” Newton had to say he got his concepts from. 
Our problem is that anti-white history says that “all mankind” built up, step by step, modern Western technology. So the only reason we have explosives is because the Chinese had black powder and some Chinese wrote it down and our primitive ancestors somehow got it from them.
According to anti-white history Egyptians had developed Brain Surgery before someone showed our half-naked barbarian ancestors how to take a bath. It turns out that this Egyptian neurosurgery was trepanation, opening the skull to take off pressure, a primitive procedure carried out by shaman for thousands of years.
Not only did Egyptians not invent brain surgery, they didn’t know there WAS a brain. It was a spare part and they had no idea of its functions, as their animal-headed gods demonstrate.
The brain was first described in the late 17th century in the Circle of Willis. Galen put all thought in the heart.
An engineering student will try to tell you that Calculus was actually just a natural development from Euclid. Like any serious knowledge of the brain, Calculus is entirely a product, not just of white civilization, but of white WESTERN CIVILIZATION.
Try to do Calculus with Roman Numerals.
But Mommy Professor not only spreads this crap, he DEPENDS on it.
No historian has the slightest interest in how, when Great Civilizations’ ships kept to the coasts or inside an inland sea, the illiterate savages of Northern Europe were navigating the open oceans. They only did that “on the shoulders of the giants” who rowed around the Mediterranean.
Romans got soap from the Gauls. But the Romans were supposed to be the Giants who taught Gauls how to bathe at all. One historian was so frustrated at this contradiction he said that “Romans found soap in ROMAN GAUL.”
A meme is a very serious thing. Thinking out the implications of a meme is a productive and endless process. A meme reflects what Germans call a Weltanschauung, a world view.
#1 by jo3w on 10/25/2014 - 7:07 am
Memes and politics seem to have some of the same intangible qualities that make them successful. At least they are intangible for me, give me some chemicals, data and equations and I’m golden, politics on the other hand seem to require a sense that I hope can be developed.
I, of course, want to quantify what the elements of successful politics are, but it seems like that is the same as asking a musician to quantify a top hit. We can discuss the elements of a great song but a musician can just feel their way through.
Im stuck with quantifying, so here goes. From what I observe, and as pointed out in the title, a meme causes a thought process in the reader. That part seems easy, unfortunately there’s more. To be successful the meme must cause a desired thought process/conclusion in a specific group of people. Considering that the average BUGSter or openly proWhite thought process is most likely different than the average White person, this may prove challenging for some of us. Another challenge to overcome is knowing when delivering your meme will be effective. Recently I have been surprised that some places I post have a great deal of approval when I was expecting lots of thumbs down and nasty PC comments. It also made me suspect that I am grossly overthinking what makes people respond to a meme.
I feel like I have made a great deal of improvements in this area, but I’m sure that when I begin discussion on these topics you could see my “eyes go out” like Bob refers to “Black leaders” when they start parroting the party line. If you told me that it is OK to tailgate, you will see my eyes come back, and I now understand why that is completely useless. Tailgating requires laser focus and precision, but it PREVENTS interrogation. I could have the biggest baddest brain in the universe, but if I don’t learn to interrogate then my eyes will continue to “go out” and my effectiveness will be limited in that way.
Obviously I also need to work on brevity.
#2 by j1mmy_Zeta on 10/25/2014 - 1:48 pm
The typical formula for anti-whites is taking one small part of a story and omitting the rest so they can spin the entire even in an anti-white way.
A recent example being the “unarmed black teen” meme in the Trayvon and Michael Brown pantomimes.
#3 by Denounce Genocidists on 10/25/2014 - 4:06 pm
Newton was a genius, but he did not predict our plight today and pass down some super effective memes to prevent the possibility of the emergence of the anti-white proposition.
#4 by Denounce Genocidists on 10/25/2014 - 4:14 pm
The point is deciding the future outcome for our race is not like solving some crossword puzzle, not historical grumbles.
#5 by Denounce Genocidists on 10/25/2014 - 8:38 pm
“Romans got soap from the Gauls.”
Mommy Prof has told us on many occasions that the Romans got their stuff from the Greeks, so what can of worms are we opening up here?
No Greek soap, or Roman barbarianism for not adopting it from them?
#6 by Simmons on 10/26/2014 - 7:18 am
Its why you cannot ask our intellectuals questions and why they will not ask questions, they are passing on wisdom. And wisdom is religious, and I figured this out early in life after being pestered by the usual country preacher types that used to filter thru the area, they hated questions. They could tell you, but they quickly found the path when I learned to ask questions.
Our WN intellectuals are a combination fog horn and Christ bellowing their wisdom out thru the fog to a sea empty of ships but littered with wrecks. “No path to Whiteness save thru my essays.”
#7 by Daniel Genseric on 10/26/2014 - 9:56 am
Sometimes memes give permission or freedom back to a group who has been PUNISHED.
Free Speech is NOT a fashion show.
#8 by Carloman on 10/26/2014 - 10:35 pm
When Newton said, “I saw far because I was standing on the shoulders of giants,” he was talking about men like Kepler. He developed a general theory of gravitation by taking Kepler’s laws of planetary motion and generalizing them to the entire universe, including to things on earth. In other words, he was saying that knowledge is cumulative over generations. One doesn’t have to reinvent the wheel every time. Without Kepler, he would not have been able to develop his general theory of gravitation.
#9 by Secret Squirrel on 10/27/2014 - 12:28 am
I’m sure that unlike an Asperger sufferer, Newton had some kind of social awareness. It was legal to burn people for witchcraft in his day.
#10 by Carloman on 10/27/2014 - 12:08 pm
Which may have been why Galileo was placed under house arrest by the church. If he had shown some respect for the church’s authority, he may have been able to present his theories in a purely hypothetical and mathematical way and stayed out of trouble, leaving the theological ramifications for the church to sort out.
Even Thomas Aquinas was able to write, “It seems that God does not exist,” and then present some arguments for why God does not exist, because he immediately followed it by showing that God does exist.
#11 by Carloman on 10/26/2014 - 11:21 pm
Oh, I think I just figured out the point of today’s coaching session. When you wrote, “Newton was justifying himself to a bunch of superstitious idiots,” I responded by EXPLAINING what Newton really meant. That was all wrong! I was supposed to respond with a meme, not an explanation.
What I should have written was, “Even if Newton was justifying himself to a bunch of superstitious idiots, would that be a reason to reject the meme ‘I saw far because I was standing on the shoulders of giants’?”
So did I get today’s lesson right, Bob?
#12 by Secret Squirrel on 10/27/2014 - 12:14 am
There is a difference between thinking for one’s self and knowing what one must think, to curry favor with with authority.
#13 by Denounce Genocidists on 10/27/2014 - 3:34 am
You agree that the specifics of the meme`s origination are buried by Mommy Professor`s anti-white hijacking.
#14 by Carloman on 10/27/2014 - 12:11 pm
I was unaware that anti-Whites had hijacked that meme, but if that is the case, then, yes, I accept that.
#15 by Bob on 10/27/2014 - 9:27 am
Carloman, you got it EXACTLY right and you accepted correction like a gentleman.
#16 by Carloman on 10/27/2014 - 12:02 pm
Thanks, Bob! You are truly a giant, and I like to stand on your shoulders so that I can see farther.
#17 by j p on 11/01/2014 - 8:16 am
Whoa, whoa. This post seems like it has nordicist undertones. I thought BUGS was a white nationalist page, not a nordicist page.
“No historian has the slightest interest in how, when Great Civilizations’ ships kept to the coasts or inside an inland sea, the illiterate savages of Northern Europe were navigating the open oceans. They only did that “on the shoulders of the giants” who rowed around the Mediterranean.”
The Greeks and Romans were white. Talking about Greek or Roman superiority over the northern Europeans of the time isn’t anti-white. It’s just fact.
Today, northern Europe is greater but in the past southern Europe was. Recognising the reality that different parts of western civilization rise or fall from the top isn’t an anti-white position.
BUGS should be careful not to fall into the pit of nordic supremacy. Sure, you could say in a 19th and 20th century context Nords reigned supreme, but that hasn’t always been true historically and it may not be true in the future. For all we know, in the 22nd century the greatest white nation could be Russia.
#18 by Benjamin Newells on 11/01/2014 - 8:46 am
I actually agree with you j p. I’m tired of the nordicist crap as well.
#19 by Denounce Genocidists on 11/01/2014 - 9:00 am
Stick around and read the archives j.p
White Nationalism and Nordicism are Wordism in the BUGS worldview.
#20 by jo3w on 11/01/2014 - 3:40 pm
Disagreement of the technological superority of N. Europeans vs. S. Europeans is no reason to reject the concept that mommy professors credit “all mankind” with Western technological achievements.
Also, I had no idea this is a White Nationalist website.
#21 by Carloman on 11/01/2014 - 11:48 pm
A lot of Bob’s examples don’t make sense to me. For example, why did he write “Try to do Calculus with Roman Numerals”? Roman numerals were a White invention, whereas Arabic numerals were a non-White invention. That example seems to make the opposite point of the article. I’m beginning to think that Bob just throws those examples out there to give us practice in focusing on the target, White genocide, and ignoring any irrelevant distractions.
#22 by Jason on 11/02/2014 - 12:32 am
Ahhh but is that true!? It turns out that what they call “Arabic numerals” aren’t so Arab after all. See this entry:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabic_numerals
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu–Arabic_numeral_system
Note this quote from Wiki:
“The first positional numerical system developed in Babylon in the 2nd millennium BC. While it used a zero-like placeholder, the first true zero was developed by ancient mathematicians in the Indian Subcontinent. Arabic numerals are used to represent this Hindu-Arabic numeral system”
The people living in Babylon back then were pretty White. And the whole thing was kicked off by Aryans living in India — White India.
#23 by Benjamin Newells on 11/02/2014 - 1:55 am
“The people living in Babylon back then were pretty White.”
Any archaeological evidence to support that?
Nope. But a whole lot of wild guesses.
Now, a few points.
You think the people who brought the Indo-European languages to Europe didn’t mix with the people already living in Europe?
You keep acting as if the people who transmitted Indo-Aryan culture to India were EXACTLY like modern Europeans or something.
You take the assumption that the peoples who early on spread Indo-European languages throughout Eurasia were originally just like modern Europeans when that’s not the case at all. It’s getting quite annoying, really.
#24 by Jason on 11/02/2014 - 10:27 am
Why the tantrum? I hardly think stating people living in that region of the world 2,000 years ago were much more White than they are today is a “wild guess”. See Google for citations.
You say: “You keep acting as if the people who transmitted Indo-Aryan culture to India were EXACTLY like modern Europeans or something.”
I didn’t say they were EXACTLY like modern Europeans, but are you saying ancient Aryans weren’t White? They were members of the same RACE from what I can see.
You say: “You take the assumption that the peoples who early on spread Indo-European languages throughout Eurasia were originally just like modern Europeans when that’s not the case at all. It’s getting quite annoying, really.”
Again, I don’t see why we need to say they were exactly the same as modern Europeans. But Germans certainly thought they were related to the Aryans who invaded India. What’s so problematic about that?
And WHAT is getting annoying? I don’t even remember talking about his much before. Is this just a tantrum based on something else?
#25 by Carloman on 11/02/2014 - 11:27 pm
Jason, you just made me recall something that I had forgotten for decades. When I was in elementary school, the teachers did refer to them as Hindu-Arabic numerals. But then, at some point, we started calling them just Arabic numerals. I had never given that any thought until you just brought it up right now. Were the anti-Whites behind that change in terminology? It certainly appears that way.
#26 by Jason on 11/02/2014 - 11:46 pm
You know they are always trying to rename some White invention by another race’s name! I have become a lot more aware of it.
#27 by Benjamin Newells on 11/03/2014 - 1:59 am
Are you serious? We are not pure descendents of Indo-Europeans to begin with. The Indo-Aryans were a different sub-branch of Indo-Europeans to begin with. Modern Europeans have no claim to Indo-Aryan languages or culture.
No, Carloman, no. Anti-whites were not trying to deprive us of our secret “Indo-Aryan” heritage.
Now go join your good pal Horus in your “Aryan” fantasy lands where you can wet yourselves over how “anti-whites have been trying to genocide the White race for thousands of years.” (Yes, Horus actually claimed that in a podcast with Lana Lokteff and has lost all credibility.) Now go join him.
#28 by Jason on 11/03/2014 - 3:14 am
Are you saying Aryans aren’t White?
#29 by j p on 11/03/2014 - 8:27 am
Look, this debate has got off-topic here.
I have always been a strong supporter of BUGS. I post the mantra all over the place. I think BUGS is the best organization that the pro-white movement right now has. The mantra talks about “all white countries and only white countries” being targeted by white genocide. Which is very true.
But now this post, by Bob Whitaker himself, speaks to divisive nordicist sentiments, by talking about how focusing on Romans’ and Greeks’ achievements at the expense of ignoring northern Europeans’ achievements at the time is somehow anti-white? First off, it’s true that Romans and Greeks were more advanced at the time. That much is just fact. Secondly it’s not anti-white to elevate one white subgroup at the expense of another. Anti-whites by definition are opposed to ALL white European peoples and cultures. The idea that they favor some is preposterous. They want to blend ALL whites out of existence, not just northern Europeans. Italy and Spain and Greece are being flooded with non-whites too.
This is dangerous territory to walk into. Once we start down this path, we will start alienating potential white allies in nations like Italy, Greece, Spain, and Portugal and their descendents in the white diaspora.
I hope Bob reads my post here and I hope he takes into consideration what I am saying. I am one of the biggest BUGS supporters you’ll ever find, and I don’t want BUGS to be led astray into the same nordicist pitfall that has ensnared so many on Stormfront and other misguided white nationalist sites.
#30 by Jason on 11/03/2014 - 10:40 am
I thought I was taking an “inclusive” approach to who is White. I included the Northern Europeans, those who came to India long ago, the ancient Persians, etc. But you were angry about that.
But now you say you are mad about separating Whites out. Well I agree, that would be bad. So I don’t’ get what you are saying at all. How does my saying ancient Babylonians were pretty White, or pointing out the Aryans who invaded Indian were White contradict that? I’m lost.
It’s important because we need to see how many White accomplishments have been labeled ‘Arab’ or ‘Hindu’ or even Chinese, when in fact it was White men who did it. They constantly trying to take credit away from Whites.
I don’t think Bob endorses Nordicism or whatever, but I will let him speak for himself. Obviously some groups did mix with others and become less White today (like in the middle east).
I suspect Bob’s point is more about Mommy Professor worship of Rome more than anything else. Bob’s harder on Rome than I am but I have had to reevaluate my beliefs about them.
#31 by j p on 11/03/2014 - 12:34 pm
Mommy professor worships Rome? That’s news to me. I find they love to talk about the greatness of non-white civilizations more than anything, ie the nature-loving amerindians and the innovative middle easterners and indians. Of course some of what they say is misleading, because many of these middle eastern and indian innovators in ancident times were in fact aryan as has been pointed out here.
#32 by j p on 11/03/2014 - 12:36 pm
Also I said nothing against your comments about ancient white aryans in Babylon or India. You are confusing me with someone else here.
#33 by Benjamin Newells on 11/03/2014 - 8:54 am
What is an Aryan?
#34 by Denounce Genocidists on 11/03/2014 - 9:07 am
Who needs to be reminded?
#35 by Benjamin Newells on 11/03/2014 - 9:19 am
Define one if you’re so confident.
#36 by Benjamin Newells on 11/03/2014 - 9:18 am
You seem to be using the term “Aryan” in place of “early Indo-Europeans who transmitted Indo-European languages to Europe”.
The term “Indo-Aryan” designates one particular sub-branch of Indo-European languages (and presumably a culture that went with it) that spread through the Middle East and eventually arrived in northern India.
#37 by Carloman on 11/03/2014 - 10:46 am
@Benjamin: First, you put too much into my comment. I simply stated that Jason’s comment reminded me of something I learned in elementary school. I wasn’t saying that we are descended from Indians, however great their civilization may have been.
But I agree with you on the rest of what you said, but with a caveat. I think what you wrote relates to what I previously wrote about Aristotle. It is not my intention to be part of a mutiny of anti-Nordicists versus pro-Nordicists. I think there are two fundamentally different ways White people think, but I think of it as Catholic versus Protestant rather than Mediterranean versus Nordic. Catholics are system builders, whereas Protestants don’t like systems. I am from a Catholic background, and, although I no longer believe in Jesus, I do like how the Catholic Church built up a big theological system based on Aristotle. I’m guessing that Bob and most BUGsers are from Protestant backgrounds, since BUGs seems to be anti-system building.
If Northern Europeans were able to develop a an astronomy, or even a complete philosophical system, independent of Aristotle, hey, that’s great. I’d love to hear about it. But Aristotle’s is the one that has come down to us, so that’s the one that I’m interested in.
But, as I started to say in an earlier post, I think that Bob’s Coaching sessions are no longer about instruction. I think they’re now tests to see how much we understand. So he throws these things like Roman numerals at us to see how we react. This is how, I think, Bob wants us to respond:
Spoiler alert:
.
.
.
Even if Arabic numerals are superior to Roman numerals, that is not a reason to claim that White civilization is derived from non-White civilization.
Even if Northern Europeans developed navigation before Southern Europeans, all White people must work together to fight White genocide,
In other words, I think he wants us to stop arguing about these things and work together, and he’s just throwing these things at us as a test. At least, that’s my take on it.
#38 by Jason on 11/03/2014 - 11:57 am
But why is there any doubt that “Arabic” numbers are superior to Roman Numerals. Of course they are. I think Bob literally means Roman Numerals are crap for advanced math.
#39 by Carloman on 11/03/2014 - 12:59 pm
Agreed, but then why did he bring up Roman numerals at all, since they are a White invention? Was it because
(1) He doesn’t like Romans/Southern Europeans/Mediteranians?
(2) He believes that Hindu-Arabic numerals were also a White invention?
(3) He wants to prepare us for when an anti-White will bring up Roman numerals to show that we stole our number system from non-Whites?
That’s why I say that Bob sometimes speaks in riddles. I suppose it’s good in the sense that it gets us thinking, but sometimes it’s hard to figure out exactly what he’s getting at.
#40 by Jason on 11/03/2014 - 8:47 pm
Bob said in the past “Arabic” numerals were a White invention which actually went back to Aryans in India. I think this is actually pretty well known, except it isn’t PC to put it in such stark (pro-White) terms.
So did Kung Fu, by the way.
#41 by Jason on 11/03/2014 - 12:04 pm
The Buddha was a White man with blue eyes. All the early texts from the period make clear those Aryans were very aware of RACE and color.
To be a member of the Zoroastrian religion you had to be an Aryan. Those ancient Persians were White. So were the Indians who actually did the advanced math. So were the Babylonians.
I’m honestly not getting what the issue is here.
#42 by j p on 11/03/2014 - 12:33 pm
So you’re saying Bob is just saying these things to test us? I guess it’s possible. Thing is, though, a non-BUGSer could read this post and come away with the conclusion that BUGS are a bunch of nordicists. So it’s a dangerous game to play
#43 by Carloman on 11/03/2014 - 12:54 pm
That was exactly my point with Aristotle. A non-BUGSer with an appreciation for Aristotle could read the earlier article and come away with the conclusion that BUGS is anti-Aristotle. That’s why I sometimes don’t like Bob’s instructional methods. It’s as though he sometimes talks in riddles. But I don’t want to start a mutiny, either. Bob created the Mantra, and, were it not for Bob, we wouldn’t be here doing this.
#44 by j p on 11/03/2014 - 5:52 pm
Agree, not trying to start a mutiny. Just throwing the muddy boot.
#45 by Jason on 11/03/2014 - 8:54 pm
The problem is Aristotle Worship. Just like Galen Worship. Its more Oriental than White. It’s about memorizing and reciting words. Western Whites, at their best, put facts first, not the worship of a Great Name from the Hallowed Past.
#46 by Carloman on 11/03/2014 - 9:26 pm
Agreed 100%.
#47 by Undercover Lover on 11/03/2014 - 3:35 pm
guys, this is not stormfront.
#48 by Carloman on 11/03/2014 - 7:03 pm
I agree that whether or not ancient Indians were White or not is totally irrelevant to the subject of White genocide.
But we’re still trying to make sure that we understand Bob’s coaching session. The main idea is that anti-Whites have established the meme that White civilization has been built upon non-White achievements, and that memes are cleverly crafted to do their job. That, I believe we all understand and agree on.
But then there are the examples that Bob gives. First he gives the example of Sir Isaac Newton saying that he stood on the shoulders of giants because he could be fined if he contradicted Galen. So I guess Newton had to say that his theory of gravitation was a direct corollary of Galen’s theories on bloodletting, or something like that. Except that the Catholic church issued an edict in 1163 stating that it “abhorred” the practice and prohibiting priests and monks from practicing bloodletting. But Newton lived in Protestant England, so I guess it must have been the church of England that imposed the fine.
Then he gives the example of Egyptians’ not having invented brain surgery, which makes sense as an example supporting his thesis.
The next example he gives is how Roman Numerals are not suitable for doing Calculus. This example seems to contradict his thesis as it pertains to non-Whites. I suppose it could be used to support his thesis in a general sense, if you take Romans to be giants and Arabs to be less than giant.
Finally, he gives a couple of examples involving only White civilizations. Since no non-White civilizations are involved, the examples neither support nor contradict the thesis as it applies to non-Whites, although support it in the more general sense.
So what are we to make of these examples? My take on it is that whenever someone says something that doesn’t make sense or doesn’t seem relevant, and they quote a respected source, regardless of whether that source is Aristotle or Bob Whitaker, that we should not argue, but rather respond with “So what?” and go back to our main point.
If anyone thinks I’m missing something here (besides a few marbles), please state it so that we can discuss it further.