THE ROBERT W. WHITAKER ARCHIVE

FROM STORMFRONT ON NORTHERN AND SOUTHERN EUROPEANS | 2007-04-22

The point of my dialogue is that my being pro-white is not based on what YOU say I AM.

The enemy is out to get us ALL.

No matter what, genocide is WRONG and, by any definition the white race is irreplacable.

ABOVE ALL, this is a WAR. I don't want to be in the trenches with some guy BEHIND ME who will suddenly switch sides if someone uses some Northern and Southern European, or Germanic versus Slavic formulation.

In the 1920s the standard Yankee denunciation of the the South was that we were inferior because we had so much Celtic blood (See H.L. Mencken, but don't ask ME to Google it for you).

I don't give a damn WHAT Yankee Jim thinks of Southerners as long as his gun is shooting the same way mine is. But if you can switch sides because of what somebody else in our ranks thinks of your ancestry, then I want you miles away from me.

Why that should mystify anybody mystifies ME.

IT'S NOT CONTRADICTION, IT'S A PATTERN | 2006-10-04

When you see the world as I do, you sit in amazement at how callous people are. Many years

ago someone pointed out to me, "Bob, the thing about you is that things other people don't even notice jump our at you." The problem is that this talent for having reality jump out at you has an uncomfortable side effect. Something just jumped out at me, but I am absolutely alone in hearing what was REALLY said.

Years ago there was a televised debate about whether an AIDS-infected child should be

allowed to go to public school. The American Medical Association had a representative

there to argue in favor of the AIDS childn being in the general population. In the course

of the discussion, the moderator asked the AMA rep, "Is the AMA saying categorically that no other child can possibly get AIDS from this child?"

The AMA rep replied that the AMA could not say THAT. I sat waiting for the parent's rep to jump on that.

It was ignored.

The AMA rep was saying that the probability of one of these parents' children getting a fatal disease was low enough for the AMA to demand that the child be admitted, but NOT low enough so that the AMA could put something serious, its REPUTATION, on the line. As I say, the parents' rep didn't even NOTICE that!

So when I saw the program on reducing the probability of crime mentioned below, where the program repeated the Politically Correct line that there is no correlation between race and crime, I was not at all surprised. The AMA was simply stating publically and openly that the danger to the children was not high enough for them to fail to endorse the politically correct position. Sure, one of the kids MIGHT die, but that was not a critical matter, like the AMA's reputation.

After a while, I got used to this sort of thing. But here lies a pitfall for those in this seminar.

You see, there's more here than just the particular callous hypocrisy I see in each case.

After a while, I develop RULES about these hypocrisies.

To give another example, Enron's mantra in its adcertisements was "Ask WHY." The ad would end with an echoing voice saying, Why, why, why, why, why... And, of course, the reason thousands of people lost their jobs and their life savings was precisely becasue they never asked ENRON "Why?"

Here is the problem:

When you first learn this way of thinking, you get all wrapped up in these contradictions, these ironies that jump out at you. You are so concentrated on the asburdity of the AMA talking about its professional ethics and using its ethics to violate real ethics that you don't see the forest for the trees. I sit here waiting for people who notice that Enron advertised "Why?" when it was destroying its investors because they didn't ask "Why?" to

TAKE THE NEXT STEP.

While a few people are slowly beginning to notice the obvious ironies, I am still sitting here all by myself, waiting for them to GET it. I keep forgetting that it took ME decades to GET it.

The fact is that you are not here until you come to the realization that OF COURSE a person who destroying medical ethics is going to do so inthe name of Medical Ethics. The company that does not let people ask "Why?" is GOING to be the one that says, "Ask WHY?" Those who are for real, ongoing genocide, are OF COURSE those that are official anti-racists.

I love it when people begin to wake up. Bu when they express amazement for the tenth time that they have discovere that nobody could hate like hte Love Generation and nobody

chickened out in real life faster than The Greatest Generation, I begin to realize what my high school football coach meant when he would shout, "Feel around you, Whitaker, maybe you're still in bed!"

There comes a time when one must wake up and smell the coffee. The first time this coincidence is a contradiction. The tenth time it becomes a RULE:

When someone starts preaching, watch for this RULE.

1) anti-racist or HATE! means they are pushing genocide

2) Flower power means screaming attacks on opponents

3) when the AMA starts preaching Ethics that are Poltically Correct, they are attacking ethics

4) when the greatest generation preaches about fighting for liberty, it is the generation that gave freedom away

5) when enron talks about why, why, why, why, it is keeping anyone from asking why.

How many hints do we need?

By the way, this applies to me, too.

WATCH ME when I get off the basics I am preaching about.

MDERPELDING | 2008-04-28

As you have said before, and I won't mince words, all history is self serving bullshit. What we envision as history today is nothing more than a collection of accumulated facts from contemporary sources coupled with some sort of self-serving metaphysical poppycock that the current crop of house intellectuals wish to con the gullible with.

I read tons of so called "histories". Or maybe I should say "have read tons' of histories". In any event, what I have found is that in all cases the so-called "major events" have always been totally unexpected by their temporal contemporaries.

The "Historian" is like a Paleontologist,or a Jamaican Rastafarian. Or a Catholic Bishop.

To make an unexpected event the result of some cause that will give them power.

SLIPPING | 2012-10-14

Like other guerilla operations that have to develop their own program, we have evolved our own terminology. It is one hell of a lot easier to say "Tailgating" than it is to keep repeating the whole story, that we have found, in action, that if you keep trying to answer the crap that is thrown at you, you stop killing effectively.

There are other terms we have developed that only occur here.

One phenomenon that wastes a lot of time to explain is an error Lord Nelson made and INSTANTLY CORRECTED, which in itself is as much a lesson as anything else. But every time I talk about it I must go on to explain that the important thing was not Lord Nelson slipping into it, but his instant recognition and correction.

The first couple of times I mentioned it I explained all this, but Lord Nelson came back with another apology, which can wear you down and, more important, gets off the subject.

LN finally got the point that he should not apologize, but the fact is it gets us off the subject to talk about that original correction. WE need a TERM for that.

What LN did was to attack immigration as genocide. He left out assimilation. This is a VERY easy error to commit, and pro-whites do it all the time. It makes one's path far, far easier, because the same people who will scream anaziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews if you criticize interracial marriage will discuss immigration with you as if you were human.

Hannity heard that David Duke opposed interracial marriage and said "You really ARE a Nazi!" He himself opposes open borders. So it is easy to slip into this groove, because it is so much smoother, and you haven't realized WHY it is so much easier.

So from now on let's call this almost unnoticeable slide into respectability "Sliding."

Some of you are finding, IN ACTION, what works. Before the last few years, I had no chance to cut the Mantra.

The reason for that was that every time I brought it up, the people who discussed it were just discussing it. They had never USED it. So none of that helped me at all.

On the other hand, I really learn from BUGS reports, because they are REPORTS, not theorizing about what "people" can understand. So you have isolated what WORKS by itself in the Mantra.

You have developed mini-Mantras, a term which, justly, would have had me blowing my top five years ago.

Now you have been IN there, you have USED the Mantra, you are not talking about what theoretically might lead to something, but, from hard experience, what WORKS.

IN every subject, the instructor beats the basics in, but he is trying to get his students to the point where they can begin, very carefully, to make their own rules, their own contributions.

Please go ahead and do it.

But DON'T Slip. One person was talking about his success, but I looked over what he said, and everything he said had to do with "culture." He impressed people, but in the end he didn't SAY anything. He forgot to look at the message he left, not at how impressed others were.

If you win easily, be sure to check back and see if you didn't just Slip.