THE ROBERT W. WHITAKER ARCHIVE

THE SHARI RULE | 2009-03-27

The Shari Rule is this: "The better Shari's comment the more she apologizes for it." I have fussed at Shari for this, but she doesn't take me anymore seriously than other women do.

Oh, well, this time there was a slight deviation in that Shari apologized up front instead of at the end:

"For what it's worth, I'm getting some positive replies. "

This is a report from the front, which is what I am really looking for. Naturally while others run on endlessly, when Shari has exactly what is important here, she gives it half a sentence. But at least it IS a report from the field.

DAVE | 2007-02-09

Name: Dave

NOT SPAM

NOT SPAM

"Investors form a crowd whose collective action reflects a key aspect of man's nature as a social animal: He is strongly induced to adopt the feelings and convictions of the group."

"In a realm such as investing, in which SO FEW ARE KNOWLEDGEABLE, the TENDENCY TOWARD DEPENDENCE IS VIRTUALLY IMPULSIVE."

"As a result, market decisions are steered not by the rational decisions of individual minds, but by the peculiar collective sensibilities of the herd. The pervasive dependence among its members produces an emotional interpersonal dynamic that, like all feedback mechanisms, has form."

Comment by Robert Prechter

I urge our readers to consider Prechter's statement very carefully, as it should be generalized beyond the investment arena to the political culture as a whole.

It explains WHY "regimes" such as Political Correctness are able to gain such astonishing ascendancy in the face of all reason.

But it also explains WHY people like BW have huge influence.

Aldous Huxley was fond of repeating: "Want to solve your problems? Learn a new way of seeing."

But Huxley omitted Prechter's insight which explains the REAL REASON "the multitudes" are so sheepish: Their ignorance compels them to imitate others in the hopes that those they imitate know more than they.

Accordingly, a singular "seer" such as BW, can transform an entire culture.

These things move fast for entire eras have a habit of dying suddenly.

New worlds get born overnight.

Don't underestimate the insights posted to this blog. They are more important than you imagine.

ANOTHER WORD THAT CAUSES RESPECTABLE CONSERVATIVES TO GROVEL AND DROOL | 2003-02-22

Harvard professor Noel Ignatiev is one of the few honest men on the left. He says, "The goal of abolishing the white race is on its face so desirable that some may find it hard to believe that it could incur any opposition other than from committed white supremacists."

Respectable conservatives live to prove that they are more fanatically "anti-racist" than liberals are. "Anti-racist" means that one supports today's world policy of demanding massive third-world immigration and integration for EVERY white country and ONLY for white countries.

"Anti-racist" is a code word for abolishing the white race, as Ignatiev points out. No one is allowed to talk about what that code word "anti-racist" means. The word "racist" is used to make conservatives grovel and drool.

Respectable conservatives are allowed to speak on the liberal-ruled media because they satisfy liberals. To satisfy liberals, one thing they must do is gibber and drool when the word "racist" is used.

Another word a respectable conservative has to scream at is "isolationist."

An "isolationist" is a person who believes that America's vital interests are within our own borders.

JMCAULT'S EXCELLENT QUESTION | 2013-01-05

"I am embarrassed to have to ask such a thing and mean no disrespect, but can someone explain how I can use the information in today's article to help end White genocide and secure a future for my White children? Thank you."

The best questions I get in comments begin with an apology.

As another commenter pointed out earlier, writing is a lot of work, and I want comments on what I WROTE, and an apology means the commenter has READ what I wrote and is so on target he doesn't want to hit too hard.

Dungeoneer answered Jm's question by saying that I give you things to demonstrate and give you a chance too think of things in a Mantra way. Which is very true.

Jm's concern maybe is that I keep insisting that YOU stick to the Mantra, while I seem to roam all over the place.

I am trying to an officer's job, which is to work out a strategy while the soldiers do their job.

The problem is that in our case, the only people worth consulting with on strategy are the soldiers who know what the whole thing is about and, more importantly, how convincing people really works.

This is unique to our war. The last thing any general wants is his soldiers' opinions. Hell, even the general's opinion is of no importance, since the outcome has already been determined by the time the first shot is fired, by people no one hears about.

As I have said here at least fifty times, I do not expect to be here when it is time to go beyond the Mantra alone, so I want to leave you with as much practical preparation as I can for that time.

"How Things Work" is one of my regular topics. It is what I got paid for in practice: making things work in real power politics.

I repeat things endlessly because many commenters would see "upstate New York congressmen" and talk about that. But it is for you to get into any political maneuvering in the real world, and then the question of what sort of gathering to make a decision is likely to come up.

Do we "include everybody?" The paradox here is that "including everybody" means excluding everybody who is not already part of the elite. While I have to give examples from my time and my experience, the point of this article was to warn you that the bigger the assembly, the more the new people, you, are effectively excluded from it.

Go back and read "Democratizing Dictatorship" again and be sure that, when you finally have a chance to enter real politics, and are at the beginning, the elite doesn't exclude you by "including everybody."