The Weakest Generation came back from World War II (they were the only people who ever fought a war you know. Also, the Weakest Generation and the Jews were the only people who ever SUFFERED).

Fifty percent of them then went to college on the GI Bill of Rights.

Only a generation that had been through Obedience Training in the formative years of their lives could have let professors dig every morsel of decency out of them.

It was a generation that had learned nothing but to take orders. Before the Weakest Generation took over Americans thought of themselves as part of the great Indo- European migration which had rolled from (I think) what is now the Black Sea across Europe and across India. We were just beginning to learn the full extent of the effects of this migration when all research on this subject was banned in the name of Hitler.

You do not ask a person with a healthy mind to justify his own existence. You may discuss the meaning of life whether life is worth living, but you don't INTERNALIZE that discussion.

Since the Weakest Generation made the end of the white race the highest moral goal of our society, we need to ask how a healthy mind would deal with any OTHER academic discussion on suicide.

When you have a classroom discussion of the meaning of life or whether life is worth living, you do not decide on the basis of that discussion whether you should go home and slit your throat.

The Weakest Generation, having heard the professors explain why their race was evil, proceeded to go home and cut its throat.

The Weakest Generation, given its order, ceased to be white, they ceased to be Americans of the old sort. They ceased to be loyal to themselves and became loyal only to the words their professors gave them.

Alexander Solzhenitsyn, in discussing his own survival in the Gulag, keeps putting these words into italics: ***" an individual point of view***" Solzhenitsyn is a Russian because he is a Russian.

He keeps emphasizing how those who had to JUSTIFY their feelings of loyalty and decency could not stand up to a Marxist state.

The second you start justifying yourself to a Wordist, you become weak. No matter how strongly you feel about your particular faith in your particular set of words, the Wordist is now judge and jury.

The second you start digging into the Book of Leviticus to justify your condemnation of homosexuality you are lost.

I oppose Gay Lib because I cannot say that homosexuality is a legitimate life-style. If homosexuality is a legitimate life-style then a homosexual has as much right to try to make young people homosexuals as a Baptist does to try to make them Baptists.

I have the same objection to homosexuality as I have to worship of sterility that Christianity inherited from degenerate Zoroastrianism: it is genetic suicide. A man who tries to make young people into monks is as evil in my opinion as a homosexual who tries to make young people into homosexuals.

I have an individual point of view. I couldn't care less if you call it a prejudice or a preference. In fact, like any earlier American, if you tried to divide what I wanted into preferences and prejudices, I would ask, "Who the HELL do you think you are?"

My prejudices/preferences come from a far firmer foundation than the latest Wordism. Or the Oldest Wordism.

My individual point of view tells me what I WANT. I NEVER try to justify survival or freedom.

Words are a MEANS for me to obtain what I want. The minute you let someone use words to TELL you what you WANT, you become a slave.

Homosexuals say they want to be left alone. That is fine if they observe exactly the same rule. I do not understand homosexuals, but I also do not understand why anybody would want to be a vegetarian.

Homosexuals and people who like veggies must not try to impose the program of Gay Lib or PETA on me. They have no right to threaten what I care about.

The Weakest Generation forgot the words, "Who the HELL do you think you are?" They were trained in taking orders.

The Weakest Generation also stopped saying something else: "A man has to stand up for himself."

By "himself" I mean his individual point of view, his LOYALTIES. This is the rock on which libertarianism has foundered.

Ayn Rand, LeFevre and all the other libertarian Wordists tried to show that their words would take care of everything. They said that if you follow their words, then there will be no violence, no force, everyone will be free to do what he has a right to do.

It isn't true. You have to stand up for yourself and your OWN loyalties. You have to be willing to STOP justifying yourself to Wordists. That means there are some issues that have to be settled by your winning or you're going down fighting: "A man has to stand up for himself."

The Weakest Generation gave up being men.