THE ROBERT W. WHITAKER ARCHIVE

CRAWLING BACK INTO THE WHITE RACE | 2007-02-04

The whole Soviet system is actually hilarious now. And we are free to laugh at it. Granted tens of millions of people died under that regime, but Alan Colmes has pointed out that comparing the agony and death in Ukraine or the Gulag to Hitler's killing of JEWS "trivializes the Holocaust. Billy Graham, Jr. agreed with him.

So we can just laugh at the Soviet stuff because the massacre and agony was trivial.

Here were a bunch of eggheads, none of whom had ever held a job, much less met a payroll, who took over the entire Russian economy. When I was a professional economist we constantly had to use UN figures on "The Centrally Planned Economies" that showed the USSR rapidly overtaking the United States. When the USSR fell, we had a look at the naked economy of the USSR, and the entire economy, not just of Russia but of the whole USSR was less than half as large as that of the Netherlands alone.

But the Reds WERE good at their Ponzi scheme. They always got a great review from the "intellectuals," especially those in Europe and New England. They knew how to subvert. In short, they were good at POWER.

The cast I want to talk about now is how Stalin handled planning for the German surrender. At Potsdam in 1945 the Allies were startled to find that some of the proposal documents from Russia were dated 1941, when the LAST thing on Stalin's mind was how to handle a crushed Germany.

In June of 1941 Stalin was in total withdrawal at the shock of the German invasion. Every bit of Soviet force collapsed. But within a couple of months, while the Germans were running through the USSR and being greeted with wild joy by Soviets, he set up a group to study how to deal with the other Allies when the Soviet Army entered Berlin. No such planning group existed in the West.

But Stalin practiced political as well as military strategy. Much of the day-to-day work of the Pentagon is planning for unlikely battles, such as if Denmark's Navy suddenly struck at the US Fleet. But, though he named himself Commander in Chief, Stalin knew he was the POLITICAL warrior who had unseated Lenin and Trotsky. Hitler fancied himself, with some justification, as a military genius. Stalin knew his talent was political, power warfare, which, in the long run, is FAR more important than military strategy.

So Stalin set up a group to study German defeat when his great concern was survival, just as professional military planners routinely spend most of their time on unlikely scenarios. And, more to the point here, just the way professional POLITICAL planners spend THEIR time dealing with questions that are of no interest whatsoever to the headline hounds.

Stalin figured he could 1) Lost, 2) fight an endless war of the type he would have had to fight if Churchill hadn't become fanatically pro-Communist with Roosevelt, or 3) He would be part of a complete Allied victory. So he had sections dedicated to each contingency. The Soviets came to Yalta and Potsdam completely prepared. The Allies, who had been sporting "V for Victory" signs for six years, had done NO planning for these conferences.

I am a POLITICAL warrior. My military experience is largely limited to discovering that if there is enough incoming, I can dig my nose into solid rock.

As I have explained many times, the probably future of Western countries is based on the idea that a massive influx of non-whites will end the status of non-whites as nothing but the liberals' Faithful Colored Companions. When leftists were importing Moslems, they thought they were bringing in automatic leftist votes and nothing else. Now they are making Europe make Hitler look like a Jew Lover.

The future is not leftist revolution, the future is RACIAL. All of our political dialogue has relegated the old economic issues to such a low level that we cannot believe that the budget used to be about all there was to politics.

Where will anti-whites whites, those whose whole interest is in Praise the Lord or socialism, be in the future? Right now they are leading their black and tan minorities, a la Ted Kennedy, but the new natives are getting restless. Bill Cosby runs into criticism that he is not black enough. Hispanics are getting restless, big-time.

And you ain't seen nothing yet.

My prediction is that political bargaining will, probably without being openly recognized as such, more and more racial. There will no place for a legion of non-whites for whom white liberals speak. In a social animal, it is critical to be part of some group. Right now Mommy Professors white kids, including the white-headed ones who still belong to the 1960s, have a group.

But think about the 60s. Go down Haight-Ashbury where the legions of The Children of the Future hung out. Go there and try to be a hippie today and you will see the future of the Mommy Professorites, the antis, who are so numerous today. I saw thousands of the millions of uniformed (beads, headband) hippies then who said they represented Youth and the Future. Go to their nests today and you can hear the wind and see the tumbleweed go by.

Tomorrow the antis, the race traitors, will have to crawl back in. Nobody else will want them. It is time to do some planning for that right now. And we can learn from respectable conservatives what NOT to do.

Neoconservatives are liberals who saw the philosophy they had gotten fat on melting down. They were almost all Jews, but liberalism was largely Jewish. But the Jews knew when to get off a sinking ship. Respectable conservatives were ecstatic to have such Recognized Intellectuals joining them. Respectable conservatives knew that no rightists were considered intellectuals in New York and New England because these same neoconservatives had destroyed them when they were liberals.

But respectable conservatives were so delighted to have Official Intellectuals deign to speak to them they fell into a love feast: "Anything we have," They told the neos, "Is yours." And when the antis who suppressed us come in from the cold, many of us are going to say, "These are our racial brethren, especially the non-Jews. Bless their little hearts, they have seen the Light. Let them in."

I don't think I have to tell anybody who can read without moving his lips what neoconservatives DID to conservatives. So I don't have to tell you what letting in the antis in any way but on their knees and on lifetime probation will do to US.

I WANT FOR MY PEOPLE WHAT ISRAELIS WANT FOR THEIRS | 2003-05-24

Public Television had a tribute to Franz Boas as the founder of the black-Jewish alliance. Franz Boas was a Jew from Prussia and he regarded white gentiles as the common enemy of all minorities, including Jews.

Everybody agrees that liberal money is largely Jewish. I am just not supposed to say that.

But it is a critical consideration when American policy in the Middle East comes up.

What I am saying here is

1) What everybody knows is true; and

2) What you can get killed for saying.

As long as the overwhelming majority of American Jews remain dedicated to Boasian ideas, I cannot wish Israel well. If American Jews got off their anti-white kick, I would be as concerned about bombings in Israel as any decent person would be. But as long as the money that finances Israel also finances open borders and anti-white policies in America, my interests run counter to Israeli interests.

I did not make it that way. I did not declare this liberal war against my people. But it is there and it is very, very real.

Israelis cannot help that their money comes from American liberals. But Israelis are also not ignorant. Israelis know more about what is going in Jordan than the king does.

American Jewish liberals want a third-world America. That would destroy us, but it is also stupid for Israel. How long would Israel survive if America were third-world country?

Jewish liberalism is like moderate Republicanism. It is not only unprincipled, it is stupid.

If conservative Israel supporters demand that Jewish liberals stop backing our enemies, it will have an effect. But as long as all the demands go one way, everything for Israel and nothing for us, conservative Israel supporters are selling us out.

When those who finance Israel stop financing the enemies of my people, I will wish Israel well. But until liberal Jews call off this war against us, I cannot sympathize with Israel.

HISTORY: THE HAMILTON CROWD | nationalsalvation.net

"In the end, failing to deal effectively with the Hamilton crowd led to Lincoln's War, the loss of freedom, and the death of the Old Republic."

Peter, would you expand on this? I've never run across this line of reasoning before (I went to public school).

Comment by Mark

ME:

This entry does not let Peter out of making his own reply, because this is an important subject.

Sam Dickson, as usual, delivered a brilliant speech at the Council of Conservative Citizens. One of his major points was that Lincoln was elected by people who had no roots here. He talked about some of Lincoln's hate speeches in Chicago during the Lincoln-Douglas Debates when he appealed to German immigrants by saying he hated the established American Anglos who looked down on the new Germans, just as he, a poor boy from Kentucky, did.

Sam talked about the immigrants who had come to the United States, not to ***A*** state, and who thought this states rights business was absurd. To them America was a foreign country they had come to, and all they knew about it was the words it used. Their ROOTS were back in Europe. Their family did not have any roots in any particular state.

Hamilton was another resentful man who arrived in America from the West Indies in 1773. To him, America was an instrument he felt could be used to reach High Ideals. He wanted to use it to build a big standing army and a continental power. He was obsessed by America's Principles, its WORDS.

In the Civil War, Lincoln's and Hamilton's Wordism won out over Jefferson's and Jefferson Davis' IDENTITY with America as a people and a race.

Pain:

The problem is that the people who take the swords at Yorktown shouldn't. The war is won by the guerillas, and the ones who win it are the leaders. Give credit where credit is due or face trouble later.

Comment by Pain

ME:

If the enemy was the British, it may make sense to send those who have been working closely with them "to take the swords." But that says wrongly that these people - and not the guerillas - won the war.

Before American independence, the group that became the Hamiltonians were half-Tories. They were half-respectable and did not fully support independence until late in the game. They had some connections and they were able to bring ideas of independence past the radicals into the mainstream.

But if they were not full revolutionaries before the war, they were not full revolutionaries after it either.

They had other intentions.

The Jeffersonians were the real revolutionaries, and acknowledged as the true guerillas, they held power in the old republic for the next 80 years.

The Hamiltonians were the aides-de-camp, the people who occupied the "IMPORTANT" POSITIONS during the war. The "swords of battle" were surrendered to them and so they were treated with respect for those same 80 years.

Until their other intentions hatched in 1861.

WORDISM: NEVER FORGET THE OLD CONSERVATIVES' WORDIST CRIME | nationalsalvation.net

Most of what we need to think about is stuff at is so obvious that it isn't noticed.

In the 1950s conservatives could have ruled America, but they sold out all principle for two words:

Republican and Democrat.

The conservative majority was forgotten at presidential nominations because they had thrown away their vote. The Solid South would vote for a Communist if he had the Democratic label and conservatives outside the South would vote for a NAMBLA candidate if he had a Republican label.

Only on The House American Activities Committee did you see how America COULD have been governed. Party made no real difference. HUAC was run by Dixiecrats and Ashbrook conservatives.

But the rest of the government was run to appeal to those who actually VOTED, the big states who had no loyalty to either party.

I said this was criminal then and I say it was criminal now.

A ticket of Taft and Byrd could have ruled this country and everybody knew it. But all those glorious old Heroic Conservatives wouldn't support it.

Northern conservatives agreed with Senator Byrd of Virginia on everything, with Tom Dewey on almost nothing. But when the salvation of their people came up against the word Republican, it was screw everything.

Exactly the same was true of conservative Democrats. The only people who thought only of policy were the liberals.

All the professional commentators said this showed "The vote is in the middle of the road."

But then as today, the people who were really ELECTED to office were NOT middle of the road. The House and Senate, then as now, were solidly left or solidly right, with a very few ELECTED who were in between.

What is and was called "the middle" was a result of the fact that conservative voters would gladly sell their mothers into prostitution for the party label.

What stopped civil rights legislation for so long was that Southern senators filibustered and Northern Republicans would not vote for closure. The media screamed about this, but my brother put it into plain English: "The Eastern media is complaining because the National Will is being blocked by senators from the South, the West and the Middle West."

In other words, everybody outside the East, which the party labels allowed to rule on all else. Due to conservative Wordism, the East WAS the National Will.

We lost America to two words.