THE ROBERT W. WHITAKER ARCHIVE

PROMETHEUS | 2007-12-10

Women's libbers are so worried that women MIGHT be inferior to men, they do everything within their power to try and prove equality. The left fears that 'minority' groups may be inferior. That is their fear, not ours.

-- Prometheus

This is good Mantra thinking: stepping back from the immediate squabble and taking a look at the whole picture. In other words, seeing what is BASICALLY wrong with sick thinking, what they are REALLY saying, what their world view is.

C.S. Lewis's Screwtape, Senior Tempter in Hell, put it perfectly:

"The first advantage of "equality" is that it is based on a good, sound, resounding LIE. The pretty woman woman never claims that she is "equal" in looks to a plain woman. The intelligent man does not claim "equality" of intellect with a stupid one."

When you STEP BACK AND LOOK AT IT, womens' libbers do not claim that women, all things considered, are equal to men and minorities do not claim that, on balance, they are equal to whites.

Minority leaders claim that their people ARE whites. Women's libbers claim that women ARE men. Their mutual cry is:

"We are all the SAME."

The subtext, which no one seems to step back and look at, is that ANY difference from men makes a woman inferior, any difference from white is inferiority. That is as white racist and male chauvinistic as you can GET.

SIEGECRAFT: MEGAVIEWS AND RESTRAINTS | nationalsalvation.net

AFKAN:

In an earlier post, Mrpelding noted our need for a new religion. I commented on this, noting that all other religions bind the followers BACK, while Christianity - True Christianity - bound its followers FORWARD.

White Nationalism, Western Nationalism, and what could be called a possible "Movement" involving these Ideals - call it WN2/M - has not made the headway it should have for numerous reasons. Among those is the so-called "Golden Age" - Rockwell, Oliver, Pierce - was formed in the clear background of a race war defined as a "Civil Rights Movement."

ALL of these men could remember a White America, and KNEW that only a White America could be a Great Nation.

Since then, the "Civil Rights Movement" has been part and parcel of a Gramscian Institutional Transformation, and WN2/M went nowhere, compared to what could have been.

Thus, even now, the personal battles of thirty years ago are being re-fought daily on various WN bulletin boards and forums.

I am convinced it's because they, essentially, stopped moving forward; they saw the issues in one context, and are trapped in that intellectual context.

Some have moved forward, even while these battles try to drag them back - like the archaic religions, they draw them BACK to a past that never really was, where they never spend any time creating a better future.

There are exceptions, but even these are spending too much of their time fighting yesterday's conflicts.

My nephews shall not have anything to do with these dramas.

I have explained to them the conflicts they see being worked out, and have explained why nothing much has happened around WN2/M activities; everyone is still arguing over who should have won The Big Game back in high school, while our Opposition went on to colleges, and universities.

And I am tired of it.

So, we are looking to an incredible future, with the best of Bob's Insights - and the Insights of his posters - in starting with the intellectual framework of Family First - Family, as the microcosm of Race, Race as the macrocosm of Family, and Race as the Living Bridge between Family and Culture.

And, if they can learn with Paul's Meet-Ups about diplomatic and political skills, and can apply them to good effect with Dobson's Third Party, so much the better.

If this leads to them leading a new nation twenty years from now, ALL based on the foundation of Family, and Race, so much the better.

At least, I will have offered them honor, discipline, and the stars.

PETER TALKS SENSE | 2005-12-01

So what is he doing HERE?

Peter says,

"I think you all need to bury the conservative/liberal crap. First, there are very few real conservatives or liberals left. Second, if you all would just listen, you might find that the true believers on either side are starting to sound an awful lot alike. Third, conservatives are all cowards and liberals are all loonies. Dang. "

Actually, that is exactly what Anonymous said. He likes Bob's Blog because, on critical matters, we do sound a lot alike.

As Peter says, Anonymous is member of an extinct species, an actual honest-to-God liberal.

My favorite professor was one of those. He sponsored every nutcase group I set up on campus because every other professor was afraid to.

It is true, as I said below, that I am a little stunned by Anonymous saying that conservatives have cajones. But Anonymous is a liberal, and he told me I should also criticize "respectable liberals."

My reply should have been that I needed HIM to do that. I don't know them.

In fact, besides professor McConaughy, the liberals I dealt with made me a bit jealous. I did not come into contact with the ones he is referring to. Which was very fortunate for me. Dealing with respectable conservatives without actually vomiting was hard enough.

I did not need a whole new crew of Respectables to deal with. My tummy can only stand up against so much.

An awfully lot went on on Capitol Hill, even in the 1970s and 1980s, which was not a matter of ideology. I dealt with liberals who wanted to get things done, just the same as we did.

So I am used to liberals like Anonymous.

I'm spoiled, and I want to stay that way.

Anonymous identifies himself as a white gentile, and he say he against ALL genocide, including the genocide against US.

Like Professor McConaughy, he is for free speech and will take risks for it.

As far as I am concerned, that is the whole thing.

Other disagreements are trivia.

As I have said before, I am always caught off guard when someone says, "I don't agree with everythng you say." It strikes me as bit of an insult.

Did I ever ASK anybody to agree with everything I say?

I honor disagreement on issues.

And correction on facts is vital. When I confidently stated that "the firmament" meant the firm earth, a commenter pointed out politely that I was dead wrong.

It made me look silly, but I've looked silly a LOT. I look a lot worse if I am NOT corrected until I say something absurd in public. I want my commenters to do the correcting.

Anonymous, if you think I'm being unfair or personal. let me know.

And Peter, your warnings are essential. I have not lead the kind of life that makes me subtle, and far too often I have abused people who did not deserve it.

So this note to my readers:

The only reason I have something to teach is beause I am anxious to learn. If I say something that hurts you, you owe it to me, not to bear it in silence, but to correct me, either here or at [email protected]

If you wish, just tell me to obliterate your email address and I will do so.

Even my enemies always admitted that the problem with me was not that I could not be trusted, but that I could trusted far too much to do precisely what I told them I would do.

THE GREAT CIVILIZATIONS | 2004-07-09

In the great extinctions, the dominant species disappears. This happened to the dinosaurs, and this happened to the "big bugs" in the Cambrian Extinction.

The reason for this is pretty obvious, so the science bureaucracy will grind it out eventually. The dominant species concentrates on competing with itself. Different parts of this ruling species, like the dinosaurs, rule in each environment and they compete with other dinosaurs.

Meanwhile other species are at the edges, adapting to whatever is left over. Then comes the extinction, the time when every normal environment becomes uninhabitable. The animals at the edges survive in some special environments. The species which dominated all the old regular areas disappears.

While historians talk about the power of Great Civilizations, they have always been sitting ducks. The ruins of one Native American city after another can be found in the dense jungle. What happened was that they destroyed the soil and cut all the trees in a century or so, collapsed, and moved on.

Very primitive. People who destroy the soil and move on are not admirable, but since they built some buildings, that makes them Great Civilizations.

The Sahara Desert was once a Garden of Eden. Apparently men helped destroy that the same as they did the Native American Great Civilizations. In the Nile Valley, the Nile kept bringing in fresh mud, so they couldn't destroy the soil there. So they had a long-term Great Civilization.

But if anything catastrophic happened, the Nile could be blocked and that Great Civilization would be turned off like a switch. The same thing would have happened to the Great Civilization of China if the Hwang Ho or Tang Tzu Rivers had been blocked up.

It would have taken a catastrophe far smaller than the Cambrian Extinction or the one that destroyed the dinosaurs to take out any of the so-called Great Civilizations of history.

Every time a documentary describes one of those Native American Great Civilizations, it always says they were "remarkably sophisticated." They say that about everybody. But the fact is that as the Great Civilization deforested and destroyed the soil and the inevitable disasters occurred, they just had more and more human sacrifices.

In the Sahara, as the environments collapsed the shamans probably took more loco weed and said whatever sillyass thing occurred to them. If the Nile got blocked up in Egypt the Pharaoh and the priests would have done some more blubbering to their gods .

Great Civilizations before ours had exactly the same problem the dinosaurs did. All the competition was inside the protected environments they took over. The priests built a society they could dominate. They did this by declaring themselves masters of all knowledge. This blocked all real advance of knowledge, but Egypt didn't need it as long as the Nile continued its regular floods.

The Nile kept Egyptian society going, so all you had to do was secure a rank inside the society. But if the Nile went, the terrifically wildly sophisticated society would have been helpless because they knew nothing worth knowing. Like the dinosaurs, it had long since ceased to be able to deal with changes in its world. All its time had been devoted to battles for supremacy inside that world.

It used to be thought that white men would be going into space by now, just as we went across Europe and into America. We would go into space because it was there. But all our priorities are now dedicated to buying votes down here on earth. We call it "taking care of people." Everything has a code word.

The drive into pure science has been replaced by spending money and effort in political competition here inside our society. Why waste money on abstract research when millions of voters want all the research to be on AIDS?

Like the dinosaur and the dead Native American societies, we are turning inward.