THE ROBERT W. WHITAKER ARCHIVE

MANTRA FIRST, DETAILS SECOND | 2007-11-12

Nobody HEARD me, but I have told group after group that their books are USELESS without the white Mantra.***

When I was a preteen Confederate, I had no realization of what Jews had done to us. My evaluation of Jews and the Wordism that caused Catholics to push intermarriage all came later. Since Wordist propaganda seeks to produce a complete product in a mind that knows and repeats a Book with the regularity of a person who has specific forms of brain damage, each little point of the Doctrine of Jews or whatever drives a wedge between people who should be united on our side.

Our whole training says, "It's the whole Book, AT ONCE, or nothing."

No, the Mantra does not talk about Jews or Wordism or the Bilderbergers or anything else. But non one who will contribute to us will fail to realize, once he gets the picture of genocide, where it comes from. Mantra*** FIRST. THEN let someone study and put all the rest into his NEW world view.

If the Mantra*** were pushed, a thousand times as many people would READ the books on revisionist history and Jews and all the rest as read them now. David Duke or Jared Taylor would get his message across and his books sold many times better by hitting the Mantra*** in the precious minutes given him to reach the general public.

So would the rest of us.

It is hard for us to remember that the rest of the white race needs to get STARTED.

Mantra*** first, details second.

*** AFRICA FOR THE AFRICANS, ASIA FOR THE ASIANS, WHITE COUNTRIES FOR EVERYBODY!

"It is said that there is this RACE problem. They say this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours into EVERY white country and ONLY into white countries."

"The Netherlands and Belgium are as crowded as Japan or Taiwan, but nobody says Japan or Taiwan will solve this RACE problem by bringing in millions of third worlders and quote assimilating unquote with them."

"Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY white country and ONLY white countries to "assimilate," i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites."

"What if I said there was this RACE problem and this RACE problem would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were brought into EVERY black country and ONLY into black countries?"

"How long would it take anyone to realize I'm not talking about a RACE problem. I am talking about the final solution to the BLACK problem?"

"And how long would it take any sane black man to notice this and what kind of psycho black man wouldn't object to this?"

"But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against my race, the white race, Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that I am a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews."

They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white.

"Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white."

http://whitakeronline.org

http://www.nationalsalvation.net/

BBGS POLISH-ITALIAN-GREEK- JAPANESE JOKE | 2010-08-24

BBG says: "Way back there was a set up on TV in which a guy would tell a joke in English to a Frenchman who would tell it in French to an Italian, to a German, to a Spaniard and then back to English. Of course nothing of the joke survived, which was the joke. Comparing the thoughts between thinkers of differing civilizations, races and millennia is compounded interest on the routine. It cannot be done."

This really hit home. This is EXACTLY what Lawrence Brown was trying to explain in Might of the West. Accepted history tries to show a single continuum of a History of Mankind, and least of its problems is that it is in different languages.

If you go back to what the Renaissance nonsense says was the basis of our science, you find that they were talking about entirely different THINGS. BBG wrote the above in response to my description of what historians like to call the origin of our atomic science in one Greek philosopher.

He was not talking about our atomic science. He was questioning the "substance" idea in form and substance. There is no debate over this subject now. He was discussing this in a different language, a different language no matter how it is translated.

Lawrence Brown points out that few if any societies had what WE would call atheists. The world kept moving, so there must be a Prime Mover pushing it. We would call a Prime Mover a god.

Now we call it inertia. Every other society took it for granted that things could only keep moving if they were constantly pushed. But we take inertia for granted in the same way.

We are not speaking the same language. We are not living in the same world.

No other society ever divided Science and Religion the way we do. Where they were separated, they were different specialties, not different fields, and certainly no more contradictory than obstetrics contradicts ophthalmology.

The Mankind Theory of History ignores all this. It HAS to. Somehow it has to look at a seventeenth century Hottentot swimming in the Zambezi (Yes, Capoids were there then) and somehow show that that is a "stage of development" leading to the Moon Landing.

That takes a LOT of twisting. But we let them get away with it.

If we talk about the Mantra, the anti-white immediately says he is only talking his own country. So he has no idea of the fate of ALL white countries.

No one points out that he is hiding behind provinciality. Anti-whites are always talking about All Mankind and A Global Point of View. Then suddenly they say they are only talking about one country, so it isn't genocide.

Looked at one country at a time, immigration and assimilation is a policy. Looked at globally, it is genocide. They hide behind "mixing THE races," they hide behind, "I am only talking about my own country."

They are hiding behind provincialism, the same provincialism they so denounce.

Their whole world view is provincial. Mommy Professors of history refuse to talk about ancient thinking as it was. They only talk about how it led of what they call Modern Thinking, the Common Heritage of All Mankind.

The result is the same as BBG's joke. This translation loses all its relevance, nay, all its SENSE, the same way that the joke loses its humor-- it is not only no longer funny, it no longer makes SENSE.

By the time that joke comes from its tenth translation, you could easily teach how it was an entirely different joke originally, about any joke you want to make up. It could just as easily be used to show that it was a Wise Saying instead of a joke, a Wise Saying that just happens to coincide with whatever Mommy Professor is trying to sell right now.

Why is information produced. Let's say you presented that meaningless mass of words to a journal as originally being the actual joke it was, or as the road traveled by different peoples to come to a Politically Correct conclusion.

Which do you think is more likely to be published?

REPLY TO RH SMITH | 2004-10-12

When I wrote the column below, "I Love Comments," RH Smith wrote the following comment:

"Having read your material for months now the only reason I don't comment much it that it's like you're already reading my mind."

I replied:

RH Smith, you just read MY mind!

I have said before that what I want a reader of WhitakerOnline to say to himself is, "So THAT's what I was thinking!"

Things that occur to you are things that I think out and express. I am, quite literally, the voice of sanity. I am the voice of sane people whose minds did not die in college.

That is why I write this stuff. It tends to spread, because people recognize it as heresy and sanity.

If you think I am being modest, I'm not. C.S. Lewis said, "The Great Teachers do not teach new truths. They remind us of the truths we already know."

SIEGECRAFT: IN VINO VERITAS | nationalsalvation.net

When I was an Olympic-class drunk, my anti-semitism was fueled by the fact that very few Jews drink a lot. They also bad-mouthed pork chops.

Screw the International Jewish Conspiracy. This really offended me!

But one Jew was a drinking buddy of mine.

This was back in the fifties, when not every Jew was a Holocaust survivor, and this particular Jew had actually BEEN in a Nazi concentration camp. He had had it rough, or he couldn't have been a drinking buddy of MINE.

About the fifth pitcher of beer, he would always take a bleary look at me and say, "What in the hell am I doing being buddies with a friggin' NAZI?" So what was he going to do? Get smashed with another JEW?

A couple of years back, the only Jew I know who is fanatically pro-white came down here and stayed with my family. Like everybody I get along with, he was very bashful.

This latter Jew came over to my apartment and said, "I have never been treated better in my life; I never felt as much at home in my life, as I do down here with you redneck, South Carolina NAZIS!"

I repeat, he was no diplomat. He was giving us a compliment we of the cold, hard persuasion could appreciate. He had the point perfectly. We made him feel very comfortable. No pretences. None of us ever make any bones about the fact that we are, in the present parlance, anti-semitic.

That means we are unapologetic naziswhowanttokillsixmillionjews. He didn't have to fit in, as he did with other Jews. He didn't have to make nice as he did with gentiles.

Maybe only a Southerner can understand this. I can be uncompromisingly anti-semitic and not be discourteous about it.

Back when Rhodesia was fighting for its life against guerrillas led by Cuban terrorists, there was an odd little world in which Mozambique and Rhodesia were on one side, and Zambia and Tanzania were on the other, the way Germany and Italy were on one side in WWII and Britain and Russia were on the other.

In WWII Sweden and Switzerland were neutrals. The African war had its neutral area too. The neutral area was called Malawi.

That's what I HEAR. I had no part in any of this. My government files have none of this in them, and we all know that if I had been there, my files would say so.

Cubans like to get smashed. Anti-Communist mercs like to get smashed. Legend has it that there are exceptions.

The capitol of Malawi, then called Blantyre, was not as big as Bern or Zurich during WWII. There was no way that Castro's terrorists and anti-Communist mercs, though the titles are now reversed, could avoid each other. Also, they were the only people in the Metropolis of Blantyre each group who had anything to talk about with the other.

And when you're drunk you want to talk. So one of the regular sights in Blantyre was some anti-Communist merc helping a drunk out of his gourd Cuban, or vice-versa, to get back home.

In due time and in due place, they would get back to trying to kill each other. None of this is true. Check the official record.

Anyway, back to the Jew I used to get drunk with in my youth.

My memory of our discussions is somewhat selective. During the first two pitchers of beer we were both so desperate to get to our alcohol that neither of us really cared what the other said. After the fifth pitcher, I can't remember what we said.

So my recitation of our dialogue is limited to somewhere between pitcher three and pitcher five.

Another technical point: the conversation between drunks is so repetitious it is a ritual.

Boredom is welcome. You are feeling great, and you do not require stimulating conversation at that point. You just feel like babbling happily.

Besides, for some reason only Advanced Psychology could explain, your ability to comprehend new information at that point is for some reason limited. So between pitcher three and coma at pitcher five, la ronde occurred.

At pitcher three, said Jew would bitch about how JEWS turned him and his family and all the other Jews in to the Nazis.

In Schindler's List, which I saw many years later, it was uniformed JEWS who went to the concentration camps and kicked the other Jews into line. But this was thirty years before that movie came out. After seeing that, I understand what happened between me and what was then a rare Holocaust survivor at pitcher three.

Since I had been, to say the least, mellowed by my third pitcher, I would always try to be nice. This was the point at which my drinking buddy would be loose enough to give the Jews who turned him in hell.

It was also my mellow point. So he would be anti-semitic and I would be pro-semitic (philo-semitic is pretentious nonsense) for a brief period. So at this mellow point I would try to explain that those Jews were THREATENED into selling other Jews out. He would get furious and say that the bastards did it just to please the Nazis.

Remembering that gives me a whole new understanding of us white gentiles today. We don't sell each other out because we are threatened. We sell each other out to please our Politically Correct authorities.

It makes evangelicals and respectable conservatives feel all warm and fuzzy inside to lead the lynch mob against us.

Besides, they get to wear the uniforms and give us orders inside our concentration camp.

I learned something in that drunken ritual, something I understand better every day.

In vino veritas!