THE ROBERT W. WHITAKER ARCHIVE

DUKE AND THE FLOODS | 2005-09-08

– Duke, New Orleans and the Floods

I did an article below called "National Geographic Predicted New Orleans Disaster." This is the sort of thing David Duke, as governor of Louisiana would have worried about.

There is another flood, the flood of third world immigration. It is the sort of thing David Duke worries about a lot.

That sort of worrying is not appreciated by the authorities. After Duke scared them by getting the Republican nomination for governor and sixty percent of the white vote in the general election he was marked man. They spent millions of dollars to get him into a maximum security prison on a tax charge amounting to a few thousand dollars.

Duke would have worried about the precarious condition of New Orleans.

In the Moscow subway a guy was playing New Orleans jazz. David gave him money and you could tell he was deeply moved.. Dave was homesick.

David Duke would have died before he let this happen to New Orleans.

David went to prison because he was trying to protect his homeland. In an American politician that sort of concern is not only unpopular, it is illegal.

Let's look at the other end of the scale, the politician America admires and loves.

A top-level former member of the Clinton team was caught stealing documents on Clinton's policy on terrorism. He obviously intended to destroy them.

What if a top member of the NIXON team had been caught stealing original documents and smuggling them out in his coat? It would have been headlines.

So what was Clinton's attitude on terrorism?

Four more years.

Clinton's sole interest was avoiding all unpleasantness during his term of office. Disturbing matters like terrorism were simply ignored.

No one denies that Clinton is probably the greatest political genius of our age. No one really doubts that he is a complete sociopath, with no trace of conscience at all.

Decades ago Dale Carnegie made a critical point in his runaway best-seller, "How to Win Friends and Influence People." We can apply it to New Orleans today.

The voters of New Orleans did not care what planning you did for some disaster they didn't want to think about. So, according to Dale Carnegie, what DID they worry about?

Carnegie said that what happened to one's family or one's city was a minor matter. What mattered to a voter was that a politician remember his NAME. Even his greatest critics who met Clinton were overwhelmed by how he gave his whole attention to them as they talked.

Carnegie and Clinton, two men who were at the top of their generations in understanding what makes us tick.

The Carnegies and the Clintons are the people who make every society click along until the disasters strike. And that, brothers and sisters, is where revolutions come from.

Coolidge and Hoover were very popular in the 1920s.

Then the Depression struck.

Hitler and his National Socialists almost disappeared during the 1920s.

Then the Depression hit.

Which is why I did the program called "The Tide of History."

There are people who are past masters of politics as usual. They are sociopaths who know how to ride the good times. But the abrupt end of the good times is as routine as climate changes.

It seems too late when the disaster finally arrives. But, as the poem said, those who keep their heads in the middle of the storm are the ones who ride it out. Those who keep shouting, "All is lost!" are the ones who drown.

Today the people who keep shouting "All is lost!" think they are saying something new. That poem was old news when it was published two centuries ago.

What did Clinton do about terrorism? He put the question off. What did he do about the flood of third world immigration? He found ways to get votes out of it.

What did the professional politicians do about New Orleans's impending disaster? They got some good contracts for supporters building flood protection. They got lots of minority contracts.

And they got reelected.

None of them will ever miss a meal because they led their people straight into disaster. None of them will ever miss a night's sleep. Nor will they care when the revolutionaries actually take over.

They GOT theirs.

Meanwhile those of us who plan for disasters, those of us who warn against disasters, have work to do.

Duke for governor.

OUR ESTABLISHED RELIGION 2 | 2010-10-30

Born Again Christianity has reached its stagnation phase. In my youth it was growing wildly, and now it has stopped or the curve is reaching the asymptotic stage.

There are a couple of clear reasons for this. First of all, Born Again Christianity has become an industry. Those who control it now depend upon it for their livelihoods.

Secondly the same thing has happened to evagelicalism that brought down the Mainline Protestant churches in North America and the Catholic Church in South America: it put its cards in THIS world, and it LOST.

I asked before, what part of "My Kingdom is not of this world" do Bible-thumpers have trouble understanding? When the main Catholic church threw itself into being a tool of big landowners in South America and a major part of the priesthood sided with the Communists in the name of Liberation Theology, everybody had assumed it had Both Sides covered.

But both Communism and the big landowners have been discredited.

While the Catholic Church was seeking power on both sides in South American politics the evangelicals were out there conquering the next world. I saw a documentary on a back area of Bolivia or Peru, the announcer said "We are the first Westerners here," and at that moment they came on a lake some Born Again missionaries were doing baptisms.

I used to get my ammunition reloaded in the dormitories of our local Born Again theology school. Out in the African bush you would often find that the only people were mercenaries and missionaries.

Christianity in Europe has simply collapsed. Someone will write in that "they have proven" this is no longer true, but it is routine for a giant church to have a tiny group of people sitting in the front.

What caused Nietzsche to say "God is dead" was that the churches had taken on Galileo and lost, and then they had taken on every new theory in the eighteenth century and lost.

There were still lots and lots of healthy churches in America, but at the top of the intellectual ladder, from which ideas filtered down, it seems to Nietzsche that it had doomed itself.

This is of interest to us because this whole section of moving toward how or PRESENT established religion is dooming itself.

Born Agains are now more interested in Pro-Life than they are in the next world, where Jesus said HIS Kingdom is. If they had had their way, the tens of thousands of babies born from in vitro fertilization, babies who were wanted, would never have been Born.

For the moment, Pro-Life is a boon to Born Again Industry. You keep your congregation contributing and you don't go where learning to reload ammunition is a survival skill.

Christianity survived because it backed down from crap like this.

Every church in London denounced Jenner's satanic practice of putting germs from cows into human beings. But as their congregations began to die or come into church disfigured for life, they somehow totally forgot their theological objections.

Those objections are as valid today as they were then. But an industry drops any product that becomes enormously destructive to its very existence.

Prohibiting abortion is no longer on the Born Again list of possibilities, so they have branched out into crippling any research that they decide involves embryos. Eventually, as in the case of vaccinations, they will get in the way of people in wheelchairs walking and replacing diseased or aging body parts.

Then this silly crap will be seen as silly crap.

You see, the nice thing about these social issues is that they make the preacher or priest feel he is being realistic and practical. It gets him off the simple fact that either Heaven and Hell are real or he is a guy who lives on nonsense or even a guy wearing a dress for no reason.

When the church sticks to all or nothing, Heaven or Hell, not of this world, it can grow. But if the fight is over THIS world, and it goes beyond doing to others what they do to you, it goes to stagnation, and then on down.

If I were a doomed embryo I would be happy if I could be used to get somebody out of a wheel chair. But any discussion of the Golden Rule in human affairs is denounced today as Humanism.

So Born Again has stagnated.

Next I will explain my ideas as to how this is what is happening to the established religion we are under right now.

FLUX | 2008-04-28

Bob's blog doesn't seem very inspiring to make people dedicate their lives to this cause.

Bob lays out a possible future of gated, prison-like communities for whites (when we once had nation-states) — and another possible future in India of people who, besides their shared varna, will not even be our descendants.

It not only fails to inspire someone who hasn't yet become 100% dedicated, it makes one want to forget everything he's learned here and find a nice hobby to take up. What's the point of working for something now if change will happen naturally 50 or 100 years from now?

But I understand this is a straight-talking, no-nonsense blog so you get an answer when you ask for one and I'm grateful for that.

-- Al Parker

As you say, I am not a Marxist or an integrationist. I don't make up reality to look like our inevitable victory or to make you feel good.

As you indicate in your last grudging line, I do not tool my examples to make us seem like some Inevitable Flow of History. The essential media line today, as in all ages, is that what IS now leads to an INEVITABLE future.

THEIR future. I am saying all is in flux.

I'm a depressive myself, and if you choose to dwell on the example I gave to reach your depressive goal you will get there with or without me. Certainly that is what the current media want you to do with ALL present reality. I gave you an example I can see from my apartment window. A REAL one. A Marxist would have mad it more upbeat, but that is the kind of thinking BUGS does not engage in.

That is the sort of thinking you see on BBC documentaries. You get all but the last five minutes of interesting stuff. Then comes the last five minutes devoted tot he Politically Correct Summation. This tells how all that has been said fits into current Politically Correctness.

A dinosaurs documentary wind-up: See! look how long they lasted, but if we don't ratify Kyoto, we can disappear, too;

2) technological history, whoever they were talking about, including Aussie Abos, are incredibly advance despite our looking upon them as "primitive, showing that a truly assimilated society can use their genius as much as it can whites.

Everywhere here can give other examples.

Your comment is very useful. For example, I have to explain something in more detail: My optimism comes from my own experience. It was awful back then because nobody would believe that the white race was going anywhere. Now the Mantra is its own explanation. The Mantra would have made people laugh back in 1960 with the Baby Boom and national origin immigration quotas. That is the milieu in which the present immigration policy was made law in 1965.

You cannot change a world people see as frozen in s\aspic. I LIVED in a world like that.

I sound immodest, but the fact is that now I have the reality coming at us and only I know what it is like. All those people in Minnesota and Iceland to whom non-whites were whites with painted faces now have their faces jammed into their Colored Brothers' armpits. The security system you wail about is a symptom of this, not a guide to an Inevitable Future. A Norman Rockwell cover showing a brave little "Negro" girl being protected by troops is no longer all someone in Sweden likes to think of on race.

The second I give one example, you see a future of inevitable gated communities and such "Alas and Alack" crap. I see it as simply proving that there is no inevitable future. Thought Crime Laws always make it clear that the ruling group is lost. They cannot allow discussion beaus we real discussion today will NEVER lead in the direction of our Politically Correct Future as laid down in 1960.

Despite desperate efforts, the Boasian world, the world of no genetics, is DEAD. In order to preserve a rule based on Mankind Middle Eastern History, into which our present rule is hardwired, you have to suffocate all objection. That means it's doomed.

In 1960 all over the world a PREFERENCE for the survival of white people was called Nazism everywhere but in the some parts of the South. Even a SOUTH AFRICAN wrote that, with our ten percent black population, integration was a solution for US, but not for them.

Back then the argument was that you had to have a Nazi regime to do anything about genetics. Genetics will soon be a matter of preference, and it has happened far enough after Hitler that all those shrieks are now seen as part of a profit-making industry.

Now genetics will be a matter of PREFERENCE, and the whole world, not just the South, has had a good deep lungful of what mixed children look like and how their intelligence is not equal and is not the same. We have made huge progress in that direction from a time when Carleton Putnam argued in Race and Reason that IQ was different and was suppressed by all universities to today when everybody knows it is true. Now they have to keep anybody from SAYING it, which is the last ditch.

We are in a position to influence PREFERENCE, while the media and the fundamentalists are in a coalition to stop genetic research in its tracks.

Breaking down the "all races are the same" anti-Nazi Absolute was a hell of a job, but it has been done. That was the first push to get the car rolling. If you think we are marginalized now, you should have been with us back then.

But all I see is that we are going to have to be part of the formation of the future, instead of sitting around taking bets on some Inevitable. That leads to optimism or pessimism, but so do drugs.

DRAINING THE SWAMP | 2007-06-20

The article below was, as is usually the case, not the one I sat down to write.

What I WAS going to write about was a sign of real progress. Then I made two regressions. First, I was going to explain that OUR message is showing up in every mainline article about the white movement. "A plot against the white race" now appears in every sneering article. It USED to be "Hate." Now it is a crazy idea we have about this "plot against the white race." That is a MAJOR change.

But I realized that I was going to have to wade through all the "You are looking at THAT tiny thing while we are fighting Israel's war in Iraq" or "NEWS ITEM: Illegal aliens are flooding in' or "This doesn't affect the Powers That Be" and on and on and on. My point gets lost in all that muck.

Outside the blog I cannot make a point because it gets lost in the swamp of muck, stuff others want to rant on about. So I made a SECOND regression: Why is the point I am making more important than the ten thousandth repetition of a standard theme.

Well, to begin with, I made TWO regressions, two starts, before I found the NEW points I wanted to make. That should be worth something. But I wrote the article as a result of the second regression: Why should you pay special attention to the point ***I*** am trying to make?

A change in media wording certainly isn't in the same league with someone who thinks he is going to expose and bring down a world-wide conspiracy.

How do I DARE say that my observation is so critical that you must ignore tomes of material and concentrate on it? Because I have one field of expertise, and this is a seminar on it. If you are a freshman ad the professor mentions a point, you can afford to privately obsess on it. But in a real graduate seminar, your professor is following a CHAIN OF THOUGHT. It is an IMPORTANT chain, or you would not be in his seminar.

That means I am saying that I am a valuable resource AND that your Conspiracy is not as important as my expertise. That is one HELL of a claim! So how did I get to the point where I would have the chutzpah to make a claim like that?

Which is what I ended up writing abut.

And that, boys and girls, is how a SEMINAR should be conducted. After years of trying to poke supply and demand or the fact that congress has two houses down the throats of bored, hung-over and/or horny students, he FINALLY gets a chance to talk to people who are INTERESTED in his subject and who do not have to be spoon-fed.

That's what seminars USED to be and what MINE still is.

Intentional repeat:

That means I am saying that I am a valuable resource AND that your Conspiracy is not as important as my expertise. That is one HELL of a claim! So how did I get to the point where I would have the chutzpah to make a claim like that?

Which is what I ended up writing about.

What I have to say is a result of a lot of mental WORK, as you can see. I do not APPRECIATE it when somebody decides to get off the very, very subtle and complicated track I am trying to lay out by expounding on The Grassy Knoll or something.

Today, what is called "seminar" is like any other class: You learn to repeat the Party Line. So there is no ORIGINAL anything. Your notes have everything you need to know. But HERE I am not just TEACHING. I am trying to get you to JOIN me in critical thinking. That means feeling down through all the muck and finding the POINTS.

This is not your only source of mental stimulation. You can Google up tome after tome on any subject that mucks up this intellectual swamp I am picking through. PLESE NOTE: Only HERE is Covington or evolution or anti-evolution theory an intellectual swamp. There is nothing wrong with talking biology, but you should seldom do it in a physics seminar.

What I have to say is HARD to explain. I am engaged in a seminar that results from a LIFETIME of practice. I made my living figuring this stuff out. I had to CREATE this seminar at huge expense to myself and work my doctor says is more than I should be doing.

We have changed the mass media in a way THEY are not aware of. That Village Voice article would have looked VERY different a decade ago. All the swastikas and Confederate flags are incidental to our paranoia, not the result of "Hate." The THRUST is different.

AND it so happens that a lot more readers every day find the "plot against the white race" line a lot easier to accept.

That is a PRECIOUS bit of truth. But you can't SEE it until you drain the intellectual swamp before you look at it.