THE ROBERT W. WHITAKER ARCHIVE

THE FIFTH COLUMN: NO PRISONERS | 2012-06-15

Solzhenitsyn once mentioned a true story from the Gulag.    A Quaker woman was allowed to visit the Gulag, and the only inmate she quoted only asked her "How are the Negroes in America being treated?"   She reported this as the only concern prisoners in Gulag had!

They were just fine but "Your Negroes" were persecuted.  She was religiously quoted in Political Science lectures.

One of the regular stories they told us in grammar school was that William Penn was sweet to an Indian, and the Indian, a chief like all Indians, promised no Indian would ever kill a Quaker.

And, the history teacher told us gravely, no Indian ever killed a Quaker from that day on.

I must have been VERY young, because I could smell improbabilities from a very early age.

The North Carolina ancestors of Richard Nixon were known as "fighting Quakers."

In fact ALL Quakers who lived near Indians were known as "fighting Quakers."

Pennsylvania's Quakers never fought Indians because they seldom SAW Indians. The people in the mountains kept the Indians away from Philadelphia and farmland. Benjamin Franklin HATED Quakers, read his biographer about their hypocrisy.

So when it came to voting money to defend the mountains, the Quakers reverently said they did not finance war. In other colonies the safer residents just said, "No, I'm all right, Jack, so screw you."

This was about all the Gulag she reported. European Intellectuals reported it as the whole story of the so-called Gulag, which they simply refused to admit existed except as regular prisons.

For the fiftieth time, let me repeat this: all this is SAFELY in the Memory Hole.

So the Berlin Wall was a neutral device "To keep some people in and some people out."

The German public was ASTONISHED to discover that escapees were shot on sight.

That is one hell of a solid Memory Hole! A lot VISITORS like Robert Morley found guns pointed at them when they viewed the Hungarian trench from the inside while touristing Hungary.

The Quakers' passive aggression was one of the best weapons the Reds had.  The fake Leftist Hippies used the same passive aggressive approach to win for the Communists in Nam.

Those who help preserve the Memory Hole are at least as guilty as those who provide it. At least those who provide it are straight, ideological Communists. In some ways, they are like an enemy wearing a uniform.

We capture enemy soldiers, but International Law lets us EXECUTE those aiding the enemy OUT of uniform.

OLE BOB PRAISES AND THEN HE BITCHES | 2012-10-05

I bitch at you all the time.

Many a student has edged past a nervous breakdown when he had a good teacher: "Won't ANYTHING satisfy him?"

The answer, if you think about it, is no. No good teacher is EVER satisfied with a student who shows potential.

All my life I would have given intimate parts of my body to be able to talk to a group like BUGS, where I don't have to start out every time at the Kindergarten level. I do say when you do well, which is more than a lot of good teachers remember to do, but I also keep bitching.

In the article where I answered Genseric's question about the basic freedom of whites to freedom of association and to work together, the replies I got would have delighted any sane teacher.

But not me.

Commenters gave me learned discussions of freedom and related things.

But open system thinking means that there is more to a discussion than just answering the question asked.

The article reminded you that the entire anti-white tower is built on the integrationist idea that "desegregation" will collapse if one single white is allowed to escape. Hence my classic example of the SPLC seeing nothing odd about raising money to integrate northern Idaho.

Do whites have a right to work and live together?

Ask any member of Congress and he will say NO. The Supreme Court has repeatedly said NO.

As Bill O'Reilly said, "There is no room for an all-white community anywhere in the United States."

While we completely miss the point, don't even come near it, the anti-whites have always said that ANY white person allowed to prefer whites must be met by force.

So let's get our minds out of being glued to "Freedom, yes or no," a closed system. Anti-whites are absolutely agreed that ANY all-white areas would be fatal to their cause. That is possible and also great.

It's just that nobody but me is going to mention it.

And that is a situation YOU must CURE.

We may USE little but the Mantra right now. But we also have to do more general thinking HERE.

SNOBBERY VERSUS VICTORY | 2011-04-27

My brother sent me an article from the respectable conservative Weekly Standard. It has a feature picture of David Horowitz being escorted to speak at a university forum with two bodyguards. Horowitz is demanding the Academic Bill Of Rights which, among other things, says that a student should have the right to appeal if he is downgraded purely for having a political opinion other than Mommy Professor's.

The article cites numerous examples of students being flunked for having non-Marxist opinions.

President Cary Nelson of the American Association of University Professors, AAUP, fanatically opposes the measure and makes it plain that he is a Marxist. He says, as I keep pointing out to you here, that Marxists believe that "Everything is fundamentally political and there is no reason why the classroom shouldn't enjoy the benefits of a being a stage for progressive activists attempting to win converts for their cause." (Quote from article)

I wrote and published about this in 1976 which split the mainline respectable conservative publication down the middle, one side producing a review called "Read This One!" The Buckley side produced a front page article attacking me largely for my attack on "higher education."

One very essential point the front page 1976 article made was that was that redneck like me whose specialty was being out on the streets with the Wallace Democratic working stiffs WAS uniquely able to speak for what they later called "social conservatives," But not about academe.

That was up to the Buckleys of the world.

The Weekly Standard goes on to point out that "mainline conservatives" ceded higher education to the left a generation ago."

Really? What a surprise!

Does this sound familiar to anybody?

Does it sound a bit like the difference between me and Jared Taylor today?

The Weekly Standard article begins it last paragraph with, "I am persuaded that the Academic Bill of Rights didn't get a fair hearing. But I am less than certain about what to do next."

Don't blame yourself, old buddy, that "uncertainty" has been a job requirement of respectable conservatives for over forty years.

BASICS: TREASON IS SO-CALLED "LOYALTY" | nationalsalvation.net

In the Partisan Dictionary I wrote regularly for the Southern Partisan over twenty years ago I defined, sort of, the melting pot:

Melting pot - n., by definition, a melting pot is nothing specific. Anyone who can be deeply loyal to nothing specific is desperate need of psychiatric care.

Lenin kicked one of his female admirers out of his luxury home in Switzerland in 1914 when she said she understood Russians who felt patriotism with the beginning of the War. Lenin declared that patriotism had no place, no place whatsoever, in Communism.

Lenin carried this principle to an extreme no one else would have imagined. When JEWS showed up at the International saying that all nationalism was evil, and then insisted, of course, on sitting as a bloc, Lenin did not even let THEM do it! This is fanaticism no one today would understand.

In 1941 when Germany invaded Russia, Communists declared the struggle against Germany The Great Patriotic War. Most Russian refugees who came back to fight fought on this Patriotic side. The very name of the War shows that Russians, at home or abroad, would not have fought that hard for Communism, but only for Mother Russia.

But Soviet Russia was not Russia, and those who fought for it got what they deserved. As soon as the war ended, Russians who had come back to fight for the USSR were rounded up and sent to the Gulag.

These refugees assumed that the takeover by aliens had to be by force. So they saw the Germans, and only the Germans, as alien occupiers, just as Churchill saw only Germany as an invader of Poland. Fighting for ANY alien occupation is treason. Mommy Professor is as much of an alien occupier as Arab terrorists.

We have this same problem with most of those who are presently engaged in genocide against the white race. They think that as long as you can't smell gas ovens going, it isn't genocide. But just as an alien occupier doesn't have to do it by force, genocide does not require killing. You can get rid of a people, which is what genocide is, in many ways.

It is still genocide.

By the same token, any loyalty you have, any whatsoever, to the present occupation, is treason. I have no loyalty whatever to a nation of immigrants. I have no loyalty whatsoever to the institutions which use the name of Christ.

My family was in the Methodist Church since Wesley. We didn't leave it. It left us. We were all Democrats in the Solid South until the Democrats left us. Those who went with the aliens must be made to answer for it.

When the very existences of people who look like us in jeopardy, there is no room for loyalty to any other cause. Man is a visual animal, white people most of all, and you can SEE what is being done. As Dave says, it is so obvious that we have to be brainwashed not to notice it. So there is no room for any other cause. Every institution is hostile to our race's existence. Any loyalty to them, a dime in a collection plate, is treason.

Treason today is mostly an indifference to what is being done. If you help any institution that joins in that indifference, evangelical or Catholic, that is treason. If you join a movement just to maintain the borders of a melting pot, that is treason.

We can go back to bitching about theocrats and "patriotism" when OUR Great Patriotic War is over.