THE ROBERT W. WHITAKER ARCHIVE

THE SIMPLE REALITY PROBLEM | 2012-03-07

When one tries to express any Mantra Thinking, the first thing one faces is the Simple Reality Problem.

For example, when it comes to gun control or other libertarian issues, the argument immediately jumps into "Well. There could be some nut that..."

The person saying this also demands that we have An Open Society. In this, libertarians, liberals, and all doctrinaires are united. All forms of Wordism agree that, if you just apply the Doctrine in a society, it will make it safe, bountiful, and all things good, no matter who "happens" to be IN that society.

But you can't demand an open society and at the same time insist that there must be stringent laws because some nut might do something.

Permit holders have once and for all destroyed the illusion that guns are not safe in the hands of responsible citizens who have no costumes. The Memory Hole has totally swallowed up the flat declarations made by ALL gun control advocates that giving out gun permits would "lead to a bloodbath."

You haven't heard that crap mentioned ANYWHERE in sixteen years.

One documentary had a rather desperate stretch which gave me a laugh, though I am sure it completely went by the audience. It had one of the most desperate non sequitors I have ever seen. One scene stated that this guy had "filled out all the paperwork for a gun permit."

The next cut was of him robbing the bank.

Any connection between the two was never mentioned. A law against carrying a gun is no problem for a bank robber. But the documentary makers were DESPERATE to show that one permit holder had actually committed a crime. Either getting that permit was part of brilliant means of avoiding the penalty for armed robbery or that non sequitur was brought in for a reason.

Respectable conservatives don't like permits either. They never mention the "bloodbath" predictions.

That is because the simple reality demonstrated by permits is that, contrary to all Wordist doctrine, the stability of a society is not ensured by a Holy Constitution, or a Holy Church or a Universal set of Family Values.

The stability of a society depends entirely upon WHO makes that society up.

But once again the Simple Reality Problem pops up. It pops up because of tailgating.

I will point out that this whole talk about "some nut" is a total contradiction of the libertarian, liberal, and conservative shouts that THEIR set of words is all that matters, and an Open Society is fine as long as you have the right words.

But the Simple Truth Problem is that two minutes later no one will REMEMBER this point. They will be off on a Discussion comparing Ayn Rand and Igskov Diadec or somebody, involving lots and lots of Deep Wisdom and quotes popular in libservative comments.

But the point is that it doesn't MATEER whether Diadec or Kwantovich had the most impressive quote.

The Simple Truth is the point. But the simple basic point is instantly forgotten.

A society that has a Simple Reality Problem has a reality problem, which is a polite way of saying it's NUTS

COMMENTS (9)

#1 Simmons | 2012-03-07 10:06

"We ask the questions around here" could be one of our mottos.

"What the hell is Simmons talking about?", I can hear now.

Quite simple, in these Mantra exchanges we have with the high IQ white anti-Whites we are basically ASKING them to explain their genocidal intentions.

How is it working out for those high IQ white anti-whites?

#2 Dave | 2012-03-07 10:30

Wordists never get it:

"Those who own the present own the Future. Those who own the present NEVER have any serious relationship to what is really going to happen."

When you are surrounded by a pack of feral dogs, your Wordist prayers are not going to save you.

#3 herrMajor | 2012-03-07 20:28

Hey bob,

"Let's go burn group X, because their doctrine is Christianity"

"Let's go burn group Y, because their doctrines are Asatru"

"Let's go burn group Z, because their doctrines are Objective moral law"

How about we burn the doctrines and fight for our peoples?

You know Bob, I don't get why there is a "Neo-Nazism". Adolf Hitler was the first, last and only National socialist to ever exist. Do you know why?

Heinrich Himmler, the SS chief, was more loyal to the words of a specific doctrine, than to Germany and all her people.

in 1940, when Hitler became ill during the invasion of the Soviet Union, the "Esoteric/exoteric" "Germanic Pagan" elements decided that they wanted to overthrow the state leader because he was focused on the survival and prosperity of his people and not a select group. This hostile takeover, would spell the end for the National Socialists and Germany during the war.

There were more assassination attempts during that time, than in the 3rd Reichs history. When Hitler had explicitly commanded the taking of resources from the soviet union, and the cutting of it's supply lines in a "Pincer" strategy, the "Occult generals" changed the orders while he was sick, and went straight into the largest army with UNLIMITED RESOURCES.

Germany starved itself, while groups cut off their noses at one another to spite each other,meanwhile the Soviet Union was raping, murdering, and slaughtering the German people.

Hitler was not only furious, but he knowingly and willingly outright slaughtered the "Occultist SS".

The remaining Waffen-SS, the elite soldiers of the army whom he had installed to circumvent the Wiemar control over the military, were still loyal to him, not because they lovde his ideals, but because THEY LOVED GERMANY AND WERE WILLING TO DIE FOR HER.

Hitler, knowing the end was near, asked, pleaded, then commanded his last soldiers not to protect him, but to go out on the streets and protect the last people of Germany in the ruined streets of Berlin as struggling spirit of the people faught against the Red Terror in their own homes, streets and squares. In the last hours of the war, the people whom were still loyal to their nation were fighting for her valliantly against an impossibly powerful foe.

DARWIN IS WRONG, Altruism is not a weakness. IT IS the FOUNDATION of a RACE and NATION. Without it, you die like National-Socialist-Germany did, fighting each other more than the enemy

I WILL NOT DIE for WORDS, I FIGHT for MY PEOPLE.

#4 Gavin | 2012-03-07 20:33

"The stability of a society depends entirely upon WHO makes that society up."

While this is true, it is insane to say this to anyone when fighting White genocide. The POINT of a society is to provide a good life for the members of that society.

Yes "stability" is good. Yes, "a strong economy" is good; but the WHOLE POINT of a society to attain those good things for YOUR PEOPLE.

Once some dummy starts talking about "third world immigrants will make a good economy" he is ignoring the whole point of what a society is.

This is a basic reality and the fact that it is so militantly ignored drives me nuts, I feel like I am living in a madhouse.

#5 Harumphty Dumpty | 2012-03-07 21:31

Based on my experience at knoxnews.com, I doubt most mainstream people even have the concept of "society."

#6 Gavin | 2012-03-07 21:56

Same thing with most topics. We understand more compared to the average joe because we focus on it. All of those people have specialized knowledge in other areas that we don't.

Since we are specialists then our goal should not be to make everyone into specialist in our area of focus, but to aquire the skills necessary to build a good society for our people and that starts with fighting White genocide.

#7 Gavin | 2012-03-08 00:28

Wordists are lazy.

Wordists are detached from reality.

Wordists cannot solve problems.

Wordists cannot even SEE problems.

#8 herrMajor | 2012-03-08 03:26

You can only get them to see it when you write,

"The White Race exists, just not on paper."

"My people, White people, can't fit in your cubby-hole logic of 'Race doesn't exist'".

Or my favorite,

"The real world, is not found between the lines, but between the ears."

#9 Genseric | 2012-03-08 09:01

"The White Race exists, just not on paper." - herrMajor

Yes. Yes indeed. Through and during the anti-white "It's hard to see racism when you're white" campaign we notice "It's hard to see White children when you're busy writing them into non-existence."

Defamation? How about scrawling anti-white phrases all over the face of a beautiful blonde-haired, blue-eyed lass and plastering it on billboards across an entire REGION in the upper Midwest?

Got mantra?