Archive for January, 2019

Worshiping Totems, Worshiping Words

Written by Bob Whitaker

“Bob, I have always regarded Culture, writ large, as the outworking of a Religion, and the purpose of the religion was to bind our Consciousness back to the realm from whence we came, hopefully improved for our experience in this incarnation.”

Yockey is great, and I promoted him, but he and Spengler did their bit centuries after Ibn Khaldoun had the same insights. To me, the word “culture” is, as you say, a religion. It assumes, as did Spengler and Yockey, that race is not important and that this Great Culture thing moves regardless of genetics.

Willis Carto used up every excuse he could for Yockey. He wanted someone to worship, and I never have.

Yockey and Ayn Rand and Marx and Spengler all fall into the same category for me. Yockey worshiped Culture, Marx worshiped Economics, Rand worshiped Freedom. Then Yockeyists, Spenglerites, Randian Objectivists and Marxists get together and point and laugh at natives worshiping totem poles or devout, illiterate Catholics who pray to, actually pray TOWARD, statues.

I have stated how I laugh at the “intellectuals” who marvel at ridiculous “classical” sculpture or the Capitol Building because they STILL think the gray, worn-out statues they dig up are true Classical statues. Meanwhile REAL classical statues looked like the ones in (correction taken) the few Catholic churches that still have statues in them.

“Intellectuals” are the worst kind of rubes because they think they’re smart.

“Intellectuals” think it is silly for an Eskimo to assign special powers to a totem pole HE made. They laugh at an old-style Catholic who wants a statue to focus his prayers on.

Then these “intellectuals” worship Culture or Freedom or Economics, each of which is just as much a product of the people who made it as that totem and that statue is. But what is especially ironic is that the old-style Catholic KNOWS that what he or she is praying to is NOT the actual Saint.

But Rand and Marx and Yockey actually BELIEVE that the Freedom or Economics, or Great Culture they are groveling in front of has a LIFE of its OWN. Unlike the most ignorant illiterate South American Catholic, they honestly believe that this work of man’s hands is the be-all and end-all, that that product is the determinant of history.

Boys and girls, you CANNOT get dumber than THAT.


No Comments

Our Border Is No Longer A Game

Written by Bob Whitaker – Originally posted on –

Lester Maddox was a staunch segregationist who was elected governor of Georgia in the 1960s. Black riots were occurring all over the country. When a black riot took place in Augusta, Georgia, Lester Maddox stated that if any policeman did not SHOOT looters on sight, he personally would take away that officer’s badge.

The riot ended suddenly. Only one looter was shot. He was in a liquor store he had broken into, laying on the floor. That picture appeared in outraged publications all over America, especially Time Magazine. But though Time tried to make the case that the poor man was only getting liquor to take home to his starving family, it wasn’t very successful.

While I was on Capitol Hill there was a hurricane in Florida followed by massive looting. My boss, John Ashbrook, shared his senior staffer’s gift for subtlety, so he made a speech on the House Floor called, “Shoot Looters!” The main newspaper in his district attacked him violently, saying this was an irrational statement to make. After a flood of letters backing Ashbook came in, they decided it must be some kind of organized protest by Ashbrook supporters, so they did a scientific poll of the district.

They pointed out, with some embarrassment, that Eighty-One Percent (81%) of district residents backed Ashbrook: “Shoot Looters!” More than one letter to the paper said that this was the first time the writer had EVER agreed with Ashbrook on ANYTHING.

I first broached the idea of a Platform Party to Jamie Kelso as we were riding back from the DC convention. He LOVED the concept, but we had one strong disagreement. As you will see in an article below, I believe in SHOOTING anyone who comes across our border illegally. Jamie said Americans would not STAND for such a thing.

I would give a months warning in every publication in Mexico, Canada, and elsewhere. I would put up huge signs in English, Spanish, French and various Indian languages to make it clear that the US border is a DEADLINE, complete with skull and crossbones for the illiterate.

My point is this: Any other form of enforcement would be subject to debate. 

We must make it absolutely clear that the US border is not a game of hide-and-seek.

We can say that America is the world’s last superpower, but it is the only superpower in history that wants nothing but to protect its OWN borders and its own people’s interests. 

But the Preamble Party says that, on THAT point, there is no room for compromise.

Kelso says that is too violent. I say that any other approach makes the border a game of hide-and-seek.

Shoot looters. Shoot border violators. Our border is no longer a game.

There is a major side benefit to this. The United States will no longer speak in George Bush whine. We will speak little and MEAN it:

“Speak softly and carry a big stick.”

A country that shoots anyone who violates its borders can tell OPEC to cut the crap and OPEC will cut the crap.


No Comments

Our Enemy’s Mistakes

By Bob Whitaker – Originally posted 

“Bob. I’m heartened by the fact that while our “printing press” is causing the “word” to be spread to more and more people, it seems the powers that be are in a mad dash to force the dark races into historically white lands. It’s almost as if they fear our “Thesis” and are hell-bent to force their desired outcome onto us before we get a chance to scotch the wheels of their damnable actions.”

Mark, that last paragraph explains exactly what is going on. But it also demonstrates how everything they do blows up in their face.  Image may contain: one or more people and text

1) The Mantra would not have been such a bomb in their faces if they had stayed with the old gradual integration and propaganda approach. No one believed me when I said it in the 1960s, but everybody can see it now that we are being overrun.

2) Everybody else on our side looks at the other side as a giant, Hypergenius Conspiracy that makes no mistakes. I am a professional looking for the mistakes other professionals make.

I see a bunch of idiots who are so blinded by hate that they are filling Europe up with people who hate them more than Hitler did. I see a bunch of imbeciles writing laws that puts doubts about the Holocaust out in a way none of our meager powers of persuasion could have done.

In a real war, overestimating your enemy is every bit a fatal as underestimating him.

3) A recent book called “Importing Revolution” goes into the fact that the 60s radicals, who never met any working Americans, were repeating all that crap from Marx — who also never did a day’s work in his life — about “working class revolution” in America.

Meanwhile the Communist World magazine was raising hell about how MY tiny group was “part of a heavily financed right-wing conspiracy” because we routinely became spokesmen for grassroots workers’ protests that would LYNCH a Commie who showed up.

Our heavily financed little Populist Forum never even had a back account. There were three of us and we paid our own way.

We got out in the streets and we were part of making working people into Reagan Democrats. Respectable conservatives didn’t know any working people either, which is why William Rusher, publisher of National Review, came to ME after I proved we not only knew working people, they let us speak for them.

I can talk with a hardhat for hours, but an “intellectual” bores my tail off in five minutes.

4) Their strategy is, as you say, desperate. It rests on two assumptions:

a) That if they get enough of their Faithful Colored Companions in here, they will be VOTED into power;


b) A country into which they get enough of their Faithful Colored Companions will remain a DEMOCRACY. Every Communist country used to brag that over 99.5% of their population voted in every election.

Only North Korea ever declared that one hundred percent, every last one of its people, voted in one election.

Well, hell, if dead people can vote in Chicago, why can’t North Koreans who are in a hospital with a coma vote there?

c) Another problem with this strategy is the old joke about the Original Faithful Colored Companion, the Lone Ranger’s Indian Tonto. The Lone Ranger says, “Well, Tonto, those Indians have us surrounded. It looks like we’re doomed.”

And Tonto replies, “What you mean ‘We,’ Paleface?

When America breaks up into racial divisions, each representing its OWN interests, we’ll make them an offer they won’t refuse. Those who DO refuse will be left out in the cold, like the white traitors who will have no one to turn to.

This is a war. If the other side NEVER does anything stupid, you might as well start drawing up the best Unconditional Surrender document you can think of.


No Comments

Changing the Parameters

Written by Bob Whitaker. Originally posted March 3rd, 2007 –

You can get credit for a new idea. But real power of the type we wield is not based on new ideas. New ideas and information is a BYPRODUCT of what we do. We look in places that have been kept dark, so we do come up with fascinating stuff. That keeps it interesting.

But what we REALLY do is more fundamental. The Mantra is a prime example of this. When you state the Mantra, you have simply outflanked the other side completely. Suddenly all the weapons in the enemy’s arsenal, guilt, the idea that doing something for whites is a selfish thing for a white to do, the whole mass of stuff they have used for sixty years, becomes WORTHLESS.

You have not pulled a new idea, a new piece of detail abut relative racial IQ, to ANSWER their standard stuff. You have completely changed the entire subject that the debate is ABOUT. Suddenly they must defend guilt as the basis of racial suicide. Suddenly they are no longer True Idealists willing to give up their privileges as white people. They are instantly exposed as nutcases who want to DESTROY their own race to be fashionably guilty.

The Mantra is not a continuation of the old debate. It is not just another contribution to the debate between “both sides.” It completely transforms the whole terms of the argument. It is not on EITHER side. In fact, with the Mantra, the old “both sides” CEASES TO EXIST. You are changing the debate itself, you are creating a whole new set of parameters within which all the old discussion within the old parameters simply ceases to BE.

That is what my first book, A Plague on Both Your Houses did. Until it was written, nobody looked on the giant education-welfare establishment as an interest group with hundreds of billions of dollars and enormous political power. That is obvious today, but try to look it up before 1976. Conservatives back then stipulated at the beginning of every discussion that they were for greedy capitalists and military force while the other side was dedicated to True Idealism.


The conservative argument was NEVER that the other side wasn’t made up of Idealism, but only that it was IMPRACTICAL Idealism. That set of parameters changed in 1976. Even liberal commentators were committing political blasphemy. Teachers had always been sacrosanct, the focal point of Idealism. At the 1976 Democratic Convention, for the first time, commentators began to mention how many members of the National Education Association were there getting more money for their own salaries and expenditures and POWER.

Nobody even noticed that was NEW. And no one would admit they had never even noticed this before.

Changing the parameters gets you no credit, but it gives you a staggering amount of POWER.

People want credit, fame, promotions, high-sounding titles, money.

Except US.

They can have the credit, the fame, the money, the titles.

We just want to rule the world.