THE ROBERT W. WHITAKER ARCHIVE

DESCRIBING THE PAST AND PREDICTING THE FUTURE | 2007-08-20

I might as well keep talking to myself here.

As I discussed in an ignored article below, our previous problem was that we had to settle for organizing the masses, since the top of the idea chain was carefully protected at Harvard and in New York. Now the top of the idea chain is literally at our finger tips.

This changes EVERYTHING.

Someone dealt with my article Pro-White Collaborators on Stormfront with the reasonable suggestion that a real history of the pro-white movement be written. But that won't do it PRECISELY because of what I just mentioned. All the sex appeal is in Torch Light Parades a la Hitler or the forty thousand Klansmen marching in DC in 1927.

Trying to describe the importance of the intra-conservative battle which led to the "Wallace" vote becoming the Reagan Democrats and therefore to the end of the Soviet Empire holds no place in history compared to "Mr. Gorbeczev, tear down this wall!"

In the American media, as I said an ignored article, the emphasis is on shouting enemy victories and minimizing our wins. All the Torchlight Parade stuff is THEIRS.

No, a history won't do it, because a history of events has very little to do with a history of real power.

History and predicting the future have this same problem. In order for there to be a book on the future, somebody has to PAY for it. The whole field of Futurology has no connection to the future at all. Successful futurologists are people who get money and fame for predicting what people who have money and who buy books and who grant academic titles TODAY want to hear and deem reasonable.

The future is NEVER what people today deem reasonable. Least of all is the future ever what people in power and money TODAY deem reasonable.

Pain asks me to be more specific abut what I EXPECT. I can't, precisely because I don't KNOW what the future holds.

I do know that every Tough, Practical Man would have said I 1980, "So the whole Soviet Empire is just going to fold up and go away? Don't be RIDICULOUS!"

In 1980, you would find out about the future of the Soviet Union by talking to a Sovietologist. Not one of them predicted anything like what happened. That is because Sovietologists concentrate on getting PAID, not on predicting the REAL future.

The end of the Soviet Union was being determined inside the minority party, getting them to go for the "Wallace" vote. How in Heaven's name could a professional historian or Futurologist or Sovietologist, whose JOB depends on ignoring anything outside of Harvard and New York, POSSIBLY have a clue about THAT?

This is an example of how making a living predicting the future makes one absolutely helpless in the fact of the REAL future. The strategy Reagan used to bring down the Soviets had been publicly discussed among paleoconservatives for decades. Burnham talked about it for years in National Review.

Reagan found his Last Straw for the Soviet camel in the Strategic Defense Initiative, SDI. Senator Kennedy called it "Star Wars." He never knew how close he was. SDI was invented by a SCIENCE FICTION WRITER, Larry Niven, in a conference Reagan had with science fiction writers.

Why would an incoming president have a conference with people no PAID "intellectual" would take seriously?

Because Reagan did not need someone to organize a torchlight parade. He needed people who could THINK. He did NOT need more people who knew how to say what they could get PAID for in the Fashionable Opinion market place.

In other words, a history of pro-white victories wouldn't do the job because most pro-whites wouldn't recognize a victory when they SAW one.

COMMENTS (3)

#1 Simmons | 2007-08-20 10:44

I will continue to beat the dead horse about the need for white men to take to intelletual inquiry and asking the right questions. I became impressed with the Reagan admin when I read an account in one of the dead tree official opinion rags about Bob Casey CIA director. He initiated a change in thinking by asking the rhetorical challenge, "Why not win?" I for one cannot tell anyone any background on that particular phrase, but I recognize simple genius when I see it and I'll bet the most vociferous opponents to taking that tack were the professional Sovietoligists. The Mantra follows in these footsteps I think.

#2 Hardric | 2007-08-20 19:34

This is fascinating stuff. And I certainly see the future in a far different light than those who think we need to crawl under the bed, get in a fetal position, suck our thimbs, and whimper.

#3 Z | 2007-08-20 22:19

What the instructor is trying to tell us is actually quite simple. Ideologies that don't work, just don't work. They never can work because they are flawed and the laws of the universe can and will never let them work.

The Soviet system was broken from the beginning. Even if all the "experts" (Who happen to be crypto-soviets) said it was an efficient system, in the end, it fell to pieces.

Multicultural Democracies don't work. Just like communism, it has no base within the laws of the universe.

Despite the systems' own torch light parades, which may feature the "model" multicultural school or the "very loving" interracial relationship, it only appears to work because of the effort put into these parades. In fact, the best comparison we can use was the BIG BAD May Day parades through Red Square we used to see. Today's equivalent is the above mentioned "model" multicultural school.

But just as the missiles we saw were fakes, made just for the Parades, what we don't see at the "model" school is the racial achievement gap test scores packed tightly away in the Principal's desk.

The victories that the instructor speaks of are not recognized by the average expert. When the power structure gets its soon to be "North American Union" it will open the flood gates for non-whites. Many a "torch light searching racialists" will fall into despair as they figure the struggle is lost. However, this is only because the "torch light lookers" don't know about the diversity price curve which states, as the number of non-whites goes up, the amount of tolerance from Whites goes down.

You see, the more multicultural a multicultural democracy gets, the closer it gets to its collapse. Just as the Soviet system was supposed to be highly efficient, when it actually had its efficiency tested, it fell into a pile of its own contradictions.

The "strengths" of the old USSR were its "organization", "efficiency", and "production possibilities." Just as the Strengths of the New USSA are its "diversity", "tolerance", and "freedoms."

But, remember when its greatest "strengths" were tested, it ended up collapsing in a pile of it own contradictions.

Today's version of the SDI or "Wallace Democrats" (who are now named "Regan Democrats" by Conservative pundits) is the great unknown. I may see the mass migration of non-whits as today's SDI. Just as the SDI forced the USSR's collapse by exposing its greatest myth, the mass migration of non-whites (And all it's derivatives) will expose this systems' greatest myth. Historians may look back to find Ted Kennedy as our very own science fiction writer?

But its important to remember, while the SDI may have helped bring it down, its main reason for collapse was its own contradictions. The current system has no shortage of these.