THE ROBERT W. WHITAKER ARCHIVE

AUTHORITY VERSUS REALITY | 2010-10-06

New statistical studies come out all the time .and while they are selectively financed and selectively quoted, a statistical study can convey a new set of facts.

This is unique to Western Civilization. What crippled us was our devotion to old books, the thing that was called the Renaissance.

At Oxford and Cambridge in the Middle Ages, the only question as to fact was "WHO said it?" As Joe Sobran said in his Foreword to my last book, every scholar in those schools at that time believed that men had one more tooth than women.

No peasant believed that. With two gums, where would you PUT an extra tooth? They come in pairs, upper and lower. Scholars laughed indulgently at this ignorance. The peasants had not read Aristotle.

No amount of tooth counting could contradict the Ancient Wisdom.

In 1700 medicine consisted of Galen and Hypocrites, and it was WRONG. In that one field, ALL the old "knowledge" was destroyed, in the teeth of the medical establishment, because information was more available, and no amount of Authority was able to stop the growing realization that that Renaissance crap didn't WORK.

In an early Whitaker Online I gave a lengthy quote from Louis XIV's physician, Pierre Borel, which I had from a 1928 History of Medicine. No one was interested and I can't find it now. It was an attack, in the seventeenth century, for a germ theory of disease.

First of all, no one is aware that there WAS a germ theory of disease before Lister and Koch looked into their microscopes. Secondly, this long quote listed about a dozen German doctors, as examples, not as a full list, of the ignorant peasant-doctors who put forward the germ theory of syphilis.

The doctor's big line was that, "They quote no AUTHORITY."

So this showed that the germ theory of disease was widespread outside the Universities, and it showed how a fact was only Authority.

Not one single person commented on it or got the point. So I didn't repeat it. Same as my radio shows and every other thing I tried. It had nothing to do with Iraq or a great speech by one of our leaders who has been losing for fifty years.

The Classical Civilization that was supposed to have brought us ape-like Northern Europeans into the human race would stop a battle to look at chicken gizzards. Their biggest industry was the Oracle at Delphi who said things that sounded obscure but were actually meaningless.

What they said had to be true, because the Oracle was the Authority. If you didn't get it, that was YOUR fault.

If I were an official Oracle, I could answer your question with "All horses are pink" and Scholars would find some way later to show how they could see I was, in hindsight, right.

Does this sound familiar to you?

WORDISM: EVERYDAY MARXISM | nationalsalvation.net

If you read biographies of Stalin, you will encounter the term "politically correct" routinely in letters to him in the 1930s.

In Marxist terminology "political" is as common as "Allah" in Islamic correspondence. The basic premise of Marxism's that all value is produced by labor alone. Therefore every good which is consumed by anyone who is not a "worker" or an "intellectual, is taken by force:

"The distribution of goods is a POLITICAL decision."

- Karl Marx

Until the state of pure communism is reached in the inevitable Marxist history, all relationships, family, companies, international, are based on economics, and economics is political. Therefore race relations are based on power alone, so there can be no such thing as a non-white racist because of the overall power relationship between the races.

We hear this all the time from anti-whites. Trotsky had this piece of Marxist theology in mind when he coined the term "racist."

The only way anybody can have anything, according to Marxism, is to exploit others. The only basis for anybody to have anything in the future "communist" society will be for "intellectuals" to decide that they NEED it: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

You could always tell who the Marxist was on discussion shows because they never used the term "Communist" to refer to an existing government. They called all countries that had minefields and machine guns on their border to keep people in as "socialist" countries. In Marxist theology, these Progressive countries were in the socialist stage of development, whereas all others, even if they called themselves socialist like Sweden, were in the capitalist phase.

To a Marxist, referring to any country as communist was exactly like a Christian referring to an earthly location as Heaven. Some countries had truly attained the socialist phase of their development toward ultimate communism, and they shot anyone trying to escape to prove it, but there were no Communist states on earth yet.

"SOCIALISM in one country"

- Joseph Stalin

People don't really know anything about Marxism, so they do not realize that "nobody has anything they don't exploit," "only whites can be racists," and "political correctness" are straight Marxist concepts from before the Soviet Revolution of 1917.

Dave:

The portion of non-Caucasian world that has dark colored skin will never have any notion whatsoever of the technical platform that economically supports their lives.

This technical platform steadily evolves based mostly upon innovations coming from Caucasians, but not entirely.

But the important point is that it is only in the Caucasian world that thinking tends to keep up with the evolving technical platform.

Marxism is so durable in the dark colored skin world because it provides an easily understood explanation for the inferiority of dark colored skinned peoples. The Negro mind, for example, simply cannot comprehend the technical platform. It can comprehend, however, an explanation for white dominance that furnishes a sense of entitlement to dark colored skinned people.

That house spider that you see in the corner of your closet is a vulgar creature. Nevertheless, it INSISTS upon being. That is the nature of life. Correspondingly, dark colored skinned people are going to INSIST upon entitlement. Count on it and don't be so stupid as to imagine that they, in their own minds, believe they have an alternative.

And there never will be an empty bed in any prison or any venue that furnishes the basic supports of life: food and shelter. For example, it just flummoxes me how people can be so blind not to see that black males (and many white males too) commit crimes for the very purpose to getting INTO jail.

If you want to deter crime, remove the incentive: Charge room and board. No money, no bed, no heat, no food. And if the prisoner or his family has no money, let the Catholic Church (or other religious institutions) be challenged for furnishing charity. That is a good role for the Catholic Church (or other religious institutions).

But alas, our black robed geniuses, our guardians of the Constitution cannot allow that.

They are too busy furnishing incentives for criminals to attack their own families (which is what most crime really is) and to attack the public. And also they are too busy furnishing denials that they themselves are structurally part and parcel of a system that supports criminal acts for the purpose of supporting the industries revolving around the criminal justice system and its police and jailers public employee unions and the taxpayer largesse they receive.

So don't think Marxism is not going to persist. It has already proved way too durable and that is not for any trivial reasons

NEAR MISSES | 2009-07-24

I tried to Google the name of the Roman Senator who at the end of EVERY speech, said, "and let me add that Carthage is a danger to Rome and must be destroyed."

And it came to pass that Rome destroyed Carthage.

And salted the ground it stood on.

Shoving their faces in the Mantra is a direct hit. Anything else is a near miss. Near misses aren't just bad, they are the basis of the entire respectable conservative industry.

Respectable conservative is the salvation of the enemy.

The entire respectable conservative industry -- and it IS an industry bigger, than most national economies -- is based on making the opponents of Political Correctness BELIEVE their points are being addressed when they are not. Respectable conservatism IS near-misses.

I made my living for many, many years in the respectable conservative industry. I got my money and my retirement by knowing exactly what a near-miss looks like. I was high in the ranks of those who knew exactly how to make YOUR contributors an voters THINK you have made the very point they can't express, but at the same time firing just a little bit off the target, so the other side can continue the argument.

I am like a knife-thrower who has spend many years learning to miss the target by a hair's breadth. If that expert knife thrower decides to practice HITTING the target, he is deadly accurate.

THE WAY TO RUIN: BEING "THE WORLD'S LAST REMAINING SUPERPOWER" | 1999-01-09

The Eurodollar began its official existence on January 1, 1999. This new currency will replace the currencies of seventeen European countries three years from now. As one Dutch official said, this is a first step toward Europe "enjoying the power in the world that the size of its economy deserves".

But Europe is going to have to do a lot besides adopt a common currency if it is to take its place in the world. It will have to stop being a military dependent of the United States. If Europe is to take its place in the world, it will have to stop leaving every serious problem in the world to THE LAST REMAINING SUPERPOWER.

In one discussion about Europe's refusal to deal with terrorism or Balkan problems, Pat Buchanan said, "Europe will have to grow up eventually." Among today's media-selected commentators, only Buchanan would see this reality, much less mention it.

What Buchanan is referring to is this: Since 1945, Europeans have been in a state of permanent dependence on the United States. People who are protected from reality never grow up. This is as true of countries as it is of individuals.

Europe has been a military welfare case since 1945.

Don't let NATO fool you Despite its contributions to NATO, Europe has very little responsibility for living - and living very well - in the post-WWII world. NATO was set up by the United States, and the poor little Europeans were never asked to carry anything like their share of the costs in men or money for the defense of Europe.

But Europe's small share of the NATO burden is the LEAST of the situation.

Europe would not have lasted a month if someone didn't protect the rest of the world from a Communist takeover. The United States could survive economically if we were limited to the Western Hemisphere, to the area the Monroe Doctrine already covered before World War II. But Europe has to trade with the third world to survive. And Europe leaves the protection of its lifeline almost entirely to the United States. When I speak of Europe as an American military welfare case, NATO is totally irrelevant. Europe doesn't even do its share in protecting its own, tiny territory. But in the struggle to keep its lifeline open all around the world, Europe does absolutely NOTHING! And nobody notices.

If the United States had not protected the rest of the world, Europe would have been doomed. But Europe never gave a penny or a man to help this enormous job that the Untied States was doing outside Europe. In fact, Europe simply sat back and criticized American policy in fighting the Reds all around the globe.

When the United States based nuclear defenses in Europe to protect them against the USSR, Europeans rioted and protested our Evil Imperialism. When we held the Communists out of all the countries outside Europe that Europe could not live without, Europeans talked about how immoral we were.

Europe said, essentially, "Self-righteousness is our most important product."

This is the sixth decade in which Europe has been a military welfare case, dependent on the United States. This welfare mentality, this utter lack of realism, is by now welded into the European mindset.

In the 1950's, this silliness took the form of huge Communist Parties in Western Europe, and in the 1960's, every ridiculous leftist cause, such as a demand for unilateral nuclear disarmament by America, got enormous support in Europe. In every case, Europe could play its absurd little morality games because someone else was taking care of them.

In the 1970's, the United States, sick of carrying the whole weight of defending the world, cut back dangerously on its military commitment. Europe was not about to question this. And Europe did not increase its own military commitment by a single nickel. Post- World War II Europe reminds me of Peggy Bundy on Married With Children The very idea of Europe having to do anything for itself elicits nothing but an unbelieving horse laugh.

In the 1980's, the Reagan military buildup helped the ongoing Soviet economic breakdown. It was the Strategic Defense Initiative, what Teddy Kennedy and therefore all the media called "Star Wars," that finally broke the Soviet resolve. Gorbacev simply could not afford a new breakthrough program to match the American high-tech advantage.

So the left tried one last, desperate move to save the Soviet Union: Stop SDI. Every American liberal media source and practically all official opinion in Europe pulled out all the stops.

I remember the last gasp. There was a costly television flop called The Morning After, a movie demanding an immediate nuclear freeze. A lot of other shows had pushed this last desperate attempt to stop the nuclear race the USSR had lost. But, even for the leftist media, it was simply too late.

With the USSR gone, as Buchanan said, it is time, at long last, for Europe to try to begin to grow up.

But in the post-Cold War age, there is a last, desperate drive to prevent Europe from having to deal with the real world. Both the left and the respectable right in America support it. Since it is utterly divorced from reality, European opinion is trendy left, and the liberals like it that way.

The American right likes European opinion just the way it is, too. The respectable American right wants, above all else, for the United States to spend lots and lots of money on the military. They LIVE for that. If Europe began to grow up and bear its share of the military burden, the United States could cut back. The one thing ALL respectable conservatives demand is this: MORE AMERICANS IN SOLDIER SUITS. What for? Respectable conservatives don't give a reason. They talk vaguely about "obligation." But what they have wanted fifty years for is more American money on defense, and more Americans in soldier suits. So they want it now. This means European military welfarism MUST continue.

Both the left and right in America have found a slogan to keep Americans providing military welfare for Europe. Both the left and the respectable right repeat it all the time.

On the left and on the right, the slogan they use for their crusade against European adulthood is seven words long.

And here it is

"WE ARE THE WORLD'S LAST REMAINING SUPERPOWER"

The whole world can just sit back and let The Last Remaining Superpower do all the work. If anything happens anywhere in the world to threaten Europe or Europe's lifelines, Europeans can just sit back and relax. Taking care of the whole world is America's job.

There is plenty of oil in the Western Hemisphere for the United States. But Saddam and every other problem in the Middle East, where Europe's oil supply lies, must be taken care of by The Last Remaining Superpower. The United States will attack Saddam. Our "allies" (what a joke!!) just have to sit back and approve or disapprove.

Which is what our "allies" have been doing around the world for over half a century now.

Lake High has pointed out that many people oppose Southern secession because secession would mean we would no longer be part of The Last Remaining Superpower.

As Lake tells them, "I can live with that".