STORMFRONT AND DRUGS | 2007-07-18
On Stormfront, there is a big argument over whether Stormfront should ever allow anyone to even joke about "drug use." The last entry so far is someone who thunderingly announces "we" are against condoning drug use.
As Kelso keeps reminding me, there is no such thing as a "we" here. Stormfront, as Kelso points out, does not EXIST in that sense. SF is for pro-whites to talk to each other.
That is Stormfront's ONLY position, which is why we have vociferous members from Puritans to societal rebels with metal in their tongues and tatoos on their arms. We try to practice moderating, but not censorship, which those who wrote the first amendment expected any rational American to try to do.
WE, i.e., Stormfronters, even have a separate but equal section for antis, which is more than they will ever do for us.
I seriously doubt that in the four million posts we have now had on SF that more than ten writers would have denied me the use of drugs when I was injured or undergoing brain and heart surgery.
At this point one of Mommy Professor's trainees would say, "Well, what we mean is ILLICIT drug use."
But that is why my blog is called Bob's Underground GRADUATE Seminar, BUGS. We call it GRADUATE because "This blog is for people who have outgrown their college education, whether they had one or not."
So, while the rest of the world stops with that word "illicit," BUGS thinking BEGINS where Mommy Professor leaves off. I would scold one of our team if he or she left it at that, and they jump right back on me when I get intellectually lazy like that.
What is "illicit?" It means something that has not been approved by someone in a doctor's costume. There is a place to find the REAL backgrounds of doctors. It is shocking what they get away with. And every year doctors declare that what they said last year is wrong in some cases, which is GOOD. They are not Mommy Professors, if it doesn't WORK, doctors often just throw it out, unlike social programs.
As for addiction, AA has a motto, "Recovery is not for people who NEED it, it is for people who WANT it." Be it porn or drugs, society can TRY to protect the young from it. But you cannot practice multiculturalism by mixing cultures who take drugs as a matter of course and races whose only adjectives are "s..." and "f...ing" and THEN try to protect your children.
In other words, WE pro-whites are on the REAL issue here already. Before integration, drug abuse was largely restricted to blacks and Puerto Ricans. White Americans did not HAVE a drug problem outside of alcohol until the 1960s. And no country ever made as titanic an effort as Americans did to protect everybody from alcohol.
Alcohol is a DRUG, according to AA and NA. America, in fifty states and two hundred years and Prohibition, not to mention local option, has TRIED every method imaginable to restrict alcohol for generations, we have learned a lot of lessons, and we, being Americans, differ wildly about words like "illicit" and "abuse" that others simply make into law and no longer debate.
So is the answer simply to ban everybody who does not agree that all drugs are subject to the whim of a guy in a doctor suit? I'd be the first one out.
We, i.e. Americans, live in the ONLY country on this planet where our own pro-white point of view can be LEGALLY expressed, and here we are saying that no pro-white here should be allowed to SPEAK his opinion on drug use for fear of offending the Puritans or ruining the kiddies. If we go that way, SF would be put out of business tomorrow. Hell, this is the day of satellite communications, TODAY.
In Britain they ban any access to BUGS on library computers because it is "illicit." I refuse to go down THAT road.
Let me save you the trouble: "What about NAMBLA? Do we have to allow people to push man-boy sex here, too?"
This is not a criticism of what I just said. I started out by saying that we have to have moderation, not censorship, and that is why being an active moderator, something I don't have the guts to do, is so terribly difficult. No thundering generality will substitute for thought IF WE (ANY "we) ARE TO BE A FREE PEOPLE. That's why a black country can never really be free.
I do not want to exclude people from Stormfront who do not agree with the medical establishment on drug use. It is their racial views that matter. When a people cannot distinguish between banning and decent distinctions, they are already slaves.