THE ROBERT W. WHITAKER ARCHIVE

BASICS: THE FUTURE IN 1900 LOOKED WHITE | nationalsalvation.net

Well, I guess what I was asking was, what do we do since we have already experienced partial genocide? Will whites be committed to ungenociding themselves? And that question can't be answered here and now.

Comment by Al Parker

ME:

So if one of your squad gets killed, the whole group should commit suicide?

But the reason I quote this is because it is theme of a number of people.

Actually the land that Romans called Africa, at the southern of the Empire, was whiter than Italy is today. "Nubians" were captured on raids OUTSIDE the Empire. There are some very few people, like Syrians, who are unquestionably white down there, but almost everywhere there they now are definitely colored.

But after that happened there were ten times as many white people on earth as there were before. If you were to use that logic, the world in 1900 would have seen the demise of whites as natural. In 1900, Indians were referred to as The Vanishing American, blacks' death rate had doubled since the end of slavery and their population was diminishing as a percentage of America.

The future in 1900 looked white.

By 2000 the opposite became the case. Demography is a branch of economics, and no economist takes any long-term demographic prediction seriously. It has been barely thirty years since the movie Soylent Green was made, and there were roughly a hundred other books like it. All the demographic literature of the time said that Americans were multiplying so fast the day would come soon when they were LITERALLY cheek-to-cheek.

The only long-term demographic prediction I know of that was right was made by Adam Smith in The Wealth of Nations. He said America would outnumber England soon. But Smith did not even MENTION immigration. He pointed out that the NATURAL increase in our population doubled it every twenty-five or thirty years. It never even occurred to him that America was a Nation of Immigrants, or ever would be.

We talk about the "replacement rate." But, as a Dean at a Medical College just said when I brought up the question, it is unlikely that anybody born today will die before he is ready to. No matter how hard "pro-life" fights it, the human body will soon be modular, including the brain.

Also, the present system of pregnancy will soon be as optional as breast-feeding. People will CHOOSE their children. So to save our race we may just need to convince a lot of people that the end of our race is evil. I remember when the unofficial motto of our entire society was, "The white race is the cancer of history." As we are ACTUALLY overwhelmed, that kind of saying is less popular every day.

But the bottom line, the ONLY bottom line, is that people who think they are Wise and Practical as prophets of doom are just plain silly. You don't have the vaguest idea what the world will look like fifty years from now.

Reality COUNTS. CONCEPTS COUNT.

Silly-ass groans make me tired.

If you are hit in battle and you spend all your time bemoaning the guy who got killed, you can lose the whole squad.

That is no way to fight a war. A sergeant who does THAT should be put on disability as soon as possible.

JONATHAN POLLARD, ISRAELI PATRIOT | 1998-10-31

Alan Dershowitz is joining the Israeli Government and untold others in trying to get Jonathan Pollard released from his life sentence for spying for Israel. Pollard is an American citizen who was working for the United States Government, but he is Jewish, so who can object to his spying for Israel? Dershowitz has gone to great lengths to demonstrate that Pollard only spied for Israel. That makes it OK, you see.

How many other countries openly demand that their spies be given a break?

But it's OK, because this is Israel. You see, anyone who criticizes Israel is anaziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.

Also, anyone who criticizes civil rights laws is anaziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.

There are lots of other ways to be anaziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews. Black New York congressman Major Owens declared anyone who wanted to reform welfare to be anaziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews. Oh, well, by now, I've already been convicted on at least a dozen counts of being anaziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews, so I might as well raise Cain about Israel, too.

Actually, if the same logic that applies to Israel were applied to the rest of us, I wouldn't have much objection to the attitude we have toward that country. After all, I am all for a group having its own national state if it wants to. But liberals and respectable conservatives agree that this right is only to be allowed to Jews. What is absolutely outrageous is the fact that so many of the same Jews who insist on their right to Israel demand that everybody else be jammed together in a melting pot. I am sick and tired of American Jews being allowed to have American and Israeli passports, while the same Jews, as liberals, say Southern secessionists are traitors to the United States.

Liberals and respectable conservatives and Southern Crawlers all agree Israel had the right to displace the Arab inhabitants of Palestine and set up their own state. At the same time, they all agree that the South has no such rights. Why? Because our minorities might not like it.

In fact, every objection to Southern patriotism and separatism is not given a split second's consideration when it is applied to Israel.

BASICS: DIFFICULT BASICS | nationalsalvation.net

How can something called "the basics" be so difficult? You have learned a skill which the rest of us need to develop, but it will take a lot of time and effort for us to be hit with this way of thinking until we get it. Most of us have been conditioned by television and the media to absorb information uncritically.

Comment by Al Parker

ME:

To a great extent, your last sentence answers the question posed in the first one.

Absorbing opinions uncritically has been what all of mankind before the white race normally did. That is an easy pattern to impose and a hard one to break.

We broke the pattern and went for the simple answers, but there is nothing EASY about that.

Simple is not easy.

It is not difficult to say that "Walter Cronkite said so and so" or "The Great God Kufu speaking through the High Priest" said so and so. It is EASY to try to find the final truth in quotes from the Old Testament.

When Newton noticed that things fall, he deduced a whole theory of the universe from that. The concept is simple, but when you go into it, your whole blackboard fills up with calculus equations. That is NOT easy.

Once you have decided not to compromise with reality, the world becomes very difficult to deal with. You can no longer say, "Well, Father X or Reverend Y or Justice Z must be compared with the words of ...." You don't even have to wake up to talk that crap.

But reality is a tough customer. You can't quit with a quote from Father Ignatius. You can't rest until you get the ANSWER. The one that WORKS. The one that couldn't care less whether it sounds good or not.

Simple becomes very, very hard. If you realize its importance AND you have a conscience and empathy, it becomes downright cruel.

But the only alternative is to be a herd beast.

It's not Contradiction, It's a PATTERN

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 children 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 publicly 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 advertisements 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 because 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 absurdity 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 in the 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. But when they express amazement for the tenth time that they have discovered that nobody could hate like the 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 Politically 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.

HAPPY SEASON! | 1999-12-25

I want everyone who sends out "Season's Greetings" cards to think about this: what would you think of someone who saved some of these cards, and send them out to their Jewish friends at Passover? It would be bad manners, wouldn't it?

You see, Passover is not just another "season" to Jews. It is one of the two most important Jewish holidays. So you wouldn't send a "Season's Greetings" card to a Jew at Passover because Jews have feelings. Fortunately Christians don't have feelings, so you can send all the "Season's Greetings" cards you want to at Christmas.

Almost every time I get a Christmas card from another Christian it has the salutation, "Season's Greetings." No Jew is going to see the card, but it is assumed that the Jewish population will be comforted knowing that no one is saying "Merry Christmas" behind their backs. Do Jews really stay awake at night worrying that Christians may be saying "Merry Christmas" to each other? None of the Jews that I know ever did.

But no one who formulates Political Correctness cares a fig what real, flesh-and-blood Jews worry about. Those demanding that the Confederate flag come down say their only concern is that it offends black people. Polls of real black people do not indicate that the main concern of black people in South Carolina is the Confederate flag. There is no evidence that most blacks were offended by it or even concerned about it until their "leaders" told them to be ( See October 30, 1999 article, "What the Flag Boycott Really Means.").

And those black leaders were following liberal orders. This sort of Political Correctness uses minorities as an excuse. But their real aim is to dictate the behavior of the white Christian majority. The aim of Political Correctness is power, pure and simple. Today we have the once free American population blubbering excuses and begging to be told what they are allowed to say and how they are allowed to say it.

Saying what we damned well pleased used to be the hallmark of an American. For those who wanted to rule us, this proud free speech was the first obstacle they had to overcome. If you doubt it has been overcome, look at the cards you receive on December 25, and count the number that refer to Christmas by name.

Happy Season!