Government Needs White Men

 

By Alex Linder

Green niggers is a nice way to put it. As a “former” Green Nigger I put it right up with your appellation of “badge fag.”

Where did the worship of these useless at best, actively criminal at minimum, people come from?

The state. All its institutions brainwash freemen to think that Holy Government provides ‘needed’ services; without it, we’d be bereft. We’d all starve to death. Everyone who works for the government is a ‘hero’ who is ‘underpaid,’ whether she’s a teacher, cop, fireman or marine.

The state and its handmaiden media join forces in the production of this ubiquitous white and black stereotype:

1) noble, selfless, underpaid public servants;

2) evil greedy selfish private businessmen.

All in order to distract the goydolt from the bottom line: the government makes its money the same way the thief does: by taking it at gunpoint. The businessman has to serve someone to get paid. The businessman is the public servant; the government thug is the greedy bastard. The businessman the good guy, and the thief the bad guy – if you accept traditional morality, which considers theft to be wrong. Most people do. So it becomes the job of the state, through its schools and its FCC-licensed presstitutes, to obscure this underlying moral difference between rape and consensual activity. The tyrants aren’t even satisfied with moral equivalence. They demand a complete reversal – just as they do on race, you’ll notice. The rapist becomes the good guy, in their institutions and media. The economic partner becomes the bad guy. Again, perfect parallel to the way race is played.

How do the mass media, which we know are owned by anti-white jews, stereotype businessmen? Do you deny thusly?: They only care about making profits. They are overpaid. They have easy access to an endless stream of capital to carry out their nefarious plans. Ignored is the fact that most businesses fail within five years – because actually serving people is HARD, not easy. Most people live in an ego cloud. Have you noticed that? They pay no attention to others. It’s all about what they want and need. Businessmen have to come out of that cloud. They have to pay attention to people. Take them seriously. Listen to what they want and need. Supply it. You know, one definition of love is taking someone seriously. Businessmen do that. Government agencies do not. They are so not about caring for people that the DMV uncaring idiot is a comedy staple. That an anti-government trope could be normalized is more impressive than a guy head-butting his way through fifteen bricks, because that’s how strong the pro-government screen through which the mass media are filtered actually is.

Unlike private businesses, government agencies never fail, they only expand. Until the whole government collapses. After decades of stealing from honest, competent, successful men to feed greedy, tyrannical parasites. No one has any right to speak of ‘public service’ or ‘customers’ when the government retains a monopoly, forbids competition, and blatantly pisses off its forced-user base without EVER suffering any consequences for it.

The same media that make the nigger out to be the good guy lionize the government parasite. Too many WN haven’t figured this out. Giant, centralized bureaucracy is not the white man’s friend, it is his enemy. A man who needs central government for anything but collective defense has no right to call himself a white man, as he is no different from a Detroit nigger. Even if no jews or minorities existed, giant, centralized bureaucracies staffed wholly with whites would serve the worst elements in our race and exercise a very real dysgenic effect.

In 1900, the US was solvent. Was in great shape. And the federal government was comparatively tiny. Now look at it: the opposite. A gigantic, centralized bureaucratic monster has been created that eats white men to sustain itself, and does nothing but damage wherever its feet or tail hit the ground. The USA was sovereign and respected – then. Now it’s 17 trillion in hock, and hated around the globe. Jews + giant, centralized state have really worked out well for us, haven’t they?

What’s remarkable and very sad is that many racialists can’t see through the pro-government propaganda the way they can the racial propaganda. I’m asking you power-eagle fans to think about it. Is an institution that overtly discriminates against whites likely to be white-positive in other ways? Do you really believe the anti-white policy of affirmative action and general disrespect are the exception to the rule? Or is anti-whiteism in the very warp and weave of centralized government?

I’m telling you it’s all of a piece. Whites don’t need centralized government. Centralized government knows that. Centralized government needs whites! To supply the taxes it can redistribute to empower itself and the kind of creatures it favors – leftists, jews, ‘minorities,’ sexual deviants – defectives of a thousand sundry quirks. It’s the motley crew of subsidized semites and sickos against normal whites. That’s all. What I’m saying to you is that THE ENTIRE THING is against our racial interests, not just the overtly anti-white discrimination part. The DEA is anti-white. The Department of Education is anti-White. The DOD is obviously anti-White. So is every other department. Every single one.

Whites can handle their business. It’s almost what defines them, with a nod to Asian competence. That’s why decentralization is the only genuinely white political form. The other races need central dictatorship to make their decisions for them. Centralization is necessary for niggers, as they’re retarded. It’s a necessary tool for jews, who require it to manage a hostile, alien population, and yoke it to serve their tribal interests. But it’s useless for the white man apart from one purpose: defending his racial kind and community from hostile aliens. Collective defense is central government’s only legitimate function among white men. For the rest, he can devise private solutions.

Try it backward: If public school teachers (or cops, firemen, soldiers) were so great, would the jew-controlled mass media endlessly praise them? They wouldn’t. They praise them because they’re all part of a system, and that system is inherently and ineradicably anti-white. That is the basis on which our country was RE-established over the course of the 20th century. Government employees, witting or unwitting, are paid agents of the anti-whites who created the new system. They are ‘change agents’ who are to live well off the taxes on the unwilling while ushering in a new world order in which white nations have disappeared. Yes, you are forced at gunpoint to subsidize the creation of their anti-white utopia and the endless abuse and discrimination necessary to bring it about. This is tyranny, as Jefferson defined it.

The government feeds itself the same way all criminals do: by force. Private businesses feed themselves by persuading people, without the use of guns, to use their products or services. That is the fundamental difference between the two. The private sector actually serves the public; the public sector merely claims to. Again, it’s directly parallel to the racial reversal. Anyone should be able to see that.

The only service the government actually renders is to itself: entrenching and ensconcing itself, like Ted Kennedy in the back room of an expensive French restaurant, getting liquored up en route to raping a waitress. Always expanding. Always creating new problems so it can spread into new areas. Always denying its own responsibility for the problems it created or exacerbated. Always blaming the private sector for problems caused by its own regulations or operations.

Imagine if the government ran a pizza shop.

1) It would outlaw all other pizza shops.

2) It would be open from 9am to 4pm.

3) It would offer one topping: cheese.

4) It would jack up the price of cheese pizzas every six months.

5) The media would claim if it weren’t for the government, rural people and minorities wouldn’t have access to pizzas.

6) The media would advocate for Pizza Department expansion into cheeseburgers.

The natural and inevitable tendency is for all governments to evolve into East Germany.

White men need government?

Incorrect. Government needs white men. To feed on.

On Christianity vs Science, with Disrespectful Nod at Southern Culture

By Alex Linder

[ The following is from a forum thread posting. ]

Fair enough. I don’t see why people refer to that as “universalism” though.

It’s universalist because it says ALL MEN need its ONE TRUE PATH. Math/science are universal because the laws they uncover are in fact laws for all men, they are objectively and independently true. Christianity, the hapless hag that it is, has pretensions in the same direction – to universal validity. It just leaves out the whole evidence thing. What? Oh. It’s playing by special rules. Oh, ok. In fact, it’s just tennis with the net down, to use Frost’s phrase. Lots of non-science claims try to leech off the cachet of the real thing, in order to steal its prestige and obtain its respect and power. This is not honest. But all leftism follows this path. Global warming is one scam that masquerades as science. Christianity is another, even though it came first.

These are the the important facts:

1) Christianity’s central claim is not true.

2) No one needs christianity.

Are the Japanese not civilized? They aren’t christian. Nor are the Chinese. Nor are the pygmies in Africa. All of them happily live their own separate and different ways. They don’t need some fictional story about a kike to create viable societies. Shintoism, Buddhism, Confucianism – worked fine for them for 4,000 years, in case of the last.

Math is true. Christianity claims its claims are true. It can’t point to anything we would call evidence in any other circumstances to verify its claims. Rather, its claims are divine revelations. Thems kind don’t need no stinkin’ badges. You’re just to shut up and accept them. Southern man says, yessuh, ah will. Ah shorely and poorly will. By contrast, a man says, I got your evidence right here, you kike faggot fellating spiritual Q-RID sufferers. A white man laughs at what’s dumb and wrong and pretentious and dishonest. He doesn’t fall on his knees and fellate it. That is the difference. I’m not sure you can make it out, but that’s what it is. The law of gravity is real. The law that you need to accept Jesus as your personal savior or you go to hell is an unsubstantiated claim. Gravity is real. Whether you respect it, hate it, you’d best be advised to take it into account. Now, a thing like that is on a whole other order of seriousness and reality than some kike fairytale about a fictional fruitcake named jesus. But no, no, you can find high-IQ idiots by the boatload who claim that science and christianity are on par. True in different ways, by different standards. It is not so. Do not ever believe it. Jesus-our-savior is mere opinion. Don’t believe in Jesus, nothing changes, nothing ramifies. Don’t believe in gravity, well, go jump off a cliff and see what happens. There’s a difference there at least one in four Southerners might be able to make out, if he puzzle awhile over his cobbler. Rest assured, that one in four is me being charitable on this venerable holiday. (Insert Norman Fell Three’s Company grin here.) Or Phil Hartman’s acting-coach skit: This is something. This is nothing. Try to make out the difference. It doesn’t matter how many dresses you put on Big Wopper. Men mock. Women believe. Doubt is what turns Third World into First World. Faith is what turns First World into Third. Religion is the opposite of civilization.

Quote:

Science is universal, it uses the same method of analysis for humans and trees. Liberalism and Christianity don’t. They have an entirely unique system of analysis for humans. “Humanist” seems like a more fitting term to me. The problem is that Humanism is strongly ingrained in the “Western” tradition.

Neither one of us knows what you’re saying. You begin by misunderstanding universalism and proceed into darkness with the confidence of a bat but without its sonar.

Quote:

To “reject the existence of gods” means literally nothing. Do atheists reject the “existence” of Chronos? No they don’t, because Chronos is time. A concept, not a giant man. “God the Father” refers to a wide range of concepts, many of which (“the greatest conceivable existent”) go into obscure metaphysics. Claiming that “the greatest conceivable existent” “doesn’t exist” because “there’s no evidence” means you fundamentally don’t know what’s going on in the conversation. It isn’t like saying you don’t believe that the events described in the bible actually historically occurred, or that Zeus will strike you down with lightning bolts if you don’t sacrifice a calf to him.

Yeah, ok. I’m wasting my time with you.

Quote:

Atheism, like anarchism, is more of a destructive impetus than a coherent belief. At best, an “atheist” is just a skeptic. At worst, they’re edgy emo teenagers who hate anyone else having a sense of purpose or reverence. Usually they’re somewhere in between.

Look, you can’t think. And you can’t realize that, it’s above your level. Whatever wackiness drives you, the rest of us have to deal with the results. So your kind will be holding soup kitchens to pass out free food to hominid pigeons, i.e., niggers, drawing them to my area. Your kind will import Somalis and then call me a “hater” when those Somalis turn around and rape people. I’m the bad guy for talking about it. This is the insane world the lunatics of your cult have created, and I have to read on my own forum from dirt eaters about how this cult isn’t fundamentally and essentially destructive. It is.

People on your level love christianity precisely for the reason I’ve said: it’s thinking with the net down. That’s a game you’re qualified to play, unlike real tennis.

Quote:

Well, they’re smarter than people who believe the bible to be a historically accurate account of events. Their political behavior, however, is more destructive to society, and that far outweighs any personal virtues. We’re basically looking at a demographic with the political profile of a Jew (though much less power). The epitome of what Brad’s calling a “Yankee”.

It’s you dirt eaters out there murdering the jew’s enemy. Serving in the jew’s army. If you were as smart as the average rejecter — or as principled — you wouldn’t be doing that. But you’re Southerners. One expects little. Little is what you’re capable of.

Southerners keep getting their ass kicked by more intelligent folk, but their solution is never to rework their culture to celebrate and promote thinking and organization, it’s more along the lines of the cows in the add: EAT MOR DIRT. How’s that working for you, Southern ‘man’?

Quote:

Well I’m not joining your anti-marshmallow crusade. I think they’re fine.

As your attempted arguments show, you are what you eat.

Quote:

They’ve seemed pretty damn ruthless historically. Still, their “crusader” stance only works when their enemies profess a different religious doctrine. It was utterly useless in Mexico, for instance, where the Catholics let the whole place go mestizo. If there was some great Christian revolution in Europe against the “Muslims” the Arab and Black “Muslims” would just convert to Christianity to keep their welfare checks coming. Oops, Reconquista failed.

Christianity is what PREVENTED whites from simply killing off their enemies. You fucking Southerners, anti-intellectual idiots, don’t make necessary distinctions, tho it trip you 1,000x running. Parallel between Patsy Decline and the church. If the jewsmedia attack Pattycake, why, he must be one of us. That make Southern sense to a man. If the fucking leftists northern elite book-reading bastards you hate say white religious Euro-invaders committed genocide against the native pee-pulls, why, that must be true, we jes’ don’t agree it’s a bad thing, since we’re WN, it’s a good thing. When are you idiots going to stop being idiots? Yeah, I know, the answer is never, but let’s pretend it’s “sometime!” just so I don’t cry myself to sleep. Pat Buchanan IS NOT ON OUR SIDE. And, the parallel, EUROPEAN IMMIGRANTS DID NOT GENOCIDE brownskin pee-pulls. They inadvertently killed many by new diseases, borne on germs they weren’t aware of, but all these white men were there to CONVERT the savages. To civilize them. To make them into good little christians. ALL THEIR RECORDS REFLECT THIS. But you fucking idiots don’t believe in words and ideas. They don’t really matter. Distinctions? What are those? Them sound kinda faggy? I’m going muddin! You are not humans in any serious sense, that’s why I call you dirt eaters. That reflects your true cultural level. Eating dirt out of jars. Unable to think like real men. Go worship in your church. It’s all your good for. Go die for Israel. It’s all you’re capable of. You’re not white men in any real sense, just skin color, like the liberals you serve say. White men don’t act like Southern ‘men.’ Southern culture is as far from white culture as it’s possible to get. Yeah, Boers, I see your raised hand and acknowledge your claims too. You may well be even dumber and more gullible, I can’t deny that. But we’re dealing with the South tonight.

Words mean nothing. Ideas mean nothing. It’s all just faggy intellectualism. Real men are Jim Giles or WISH they could be. A pinhead and a bonehead. A pone-head! They don’t sit around thinking. They’re either eatin’ dirt or swooshing around it in pickups, or off creeping through it with rifles to shoot somebody for Uncle Shmuel.

Who can respect this region? Who can admire the ‘men’ it produces? Christ, out of every 100 hominids, only two can read above a fifth-grade level. One of them is the lawyer who ran from his own words when some Purdue cunt hailed him on the honker; the other is Brad Griffin.

I don’t know whether to laugh, cry, shit or scream. Maybe all four at the same time?

What is a white man to do with this lot?

So this church that you dirt-eating spiritual queers just love and cry when I deride and by deride I mean describe accurately says AND HAS ALWAYS SAID we are ALL GOD’S CHILDREN. Christians have always believed that. Whether they believe one race was better than another or not. That underlying belief, that profound and unalterable doctrine, that rock-hard dogma, was always there and cannot be removed. Either way, whether you’re egalitarian or racist, the CHRISTIAN whiteskin man’s duty and burden remained to educate and civilize and convert the dusky heathen – to be the darky brother’s zookeeper, as the per-verse has it. That’s still what white men believe today, whether southern or northern christian. The northern socialist-atheists you deride are ALL products of an essentially christian mentality. Rejecting the imaginary christian god by pointing out its nonexistence doesn’t imply anything else. I understand this is too fine a point for you to grasp, but others might be able to. I deserve blame, too, though, come to think of it. I never should have gone along with the common parlance and called my position atheist. I should have come up with something better. So from now I’ll be a rejecter. That’s my position. I reject bogus claims, unevidenced claims, particularly those related to fictional entities. I use ‘rejecter’ to distinguish my position from the rejecters who go on to tie that single valid position to other political positions I don’t necessarily share.

See, now, Vince, your stupidity has actually helped me, so I thank you. I am being the change I seek in the world, and embodying my criticism of Southerners by showing them a different and superior culture to their own: I changed something in my ways because it was failing. I made an improvement. I puzzled out what it was I was doing wrong, and changed my behavior, in this case my un-thought-through choice of a term to describe a certain position I and others hold. I changed a failure pattern by studying evidence, hard, clear thought, willful decision, executive action. That’s how functional culture works. That’s the White way. It is the opposite of the Southern way. I deserve no praise, though. I never should have made the mistake in the first place. Me who prides himself on thinking, intellectualism, and above all his ability to see how words, particularly political frames, are used. But I missed this key one! Terrible job on my part. <--------------- Self criticism. Not Southern. White. White-cultural essence and necessity. No development without it. Without thought and correction, feedback from reality, white man is no better than non-white man. But not all white men are capable of white culture. Christianity serves that crowd. That's one thing. But what's not acceptable is that christ-insanity JUSTIFIES THAT CROWD. By lying to it that its childish faith is just as valid as adult thinking. It is not. Jews realize this. It's why they run things while whites run to fetch water for them.

Quote:

I wish Christianity was better designed, then I could go be a traditionalist Catholic or fire-and-brimstone Baptist. No such luck.

You don’t understand what the thing is. The takeaway is that the parts in it that can’t be changed, the things that don’t move, are either anti-white or untrue (and sometimes both). The stuff that can change and move simply rides with Caesar – see the current pope pushing socialism and praising the niggers invading that Italian island, Lampedusa. But you Southerners will simply dig up any period in history when whites were doing better than today and claim it’s because of christianity. I have proved it’s not, but you can’t accept proof because you come from a culture that doesn’t believe in thinking. We’re fahtin’ men, we are. Jim Giles is you. A fisthead looking for a punchup. Not human in any genuine sense, but Southern through and through. I know something better than yours, and that’s why you’re here and I aint there. That goes for Southerners and Christians, and Christian Southerners. So fucking listen to me and learn something.

Cranberries and Cold Rain

By Alex Linder

[ The following is from a forum thread posting. ]

Ok…this is a test. It is only a test. Remain seated, standing, piked, as you wish. No actual guinea pigs, Northern Portugese, moderators, silverfish or coelacanths will be harmed in the making of this post. I will not tell you what the test is about. It’s just a small private thing of interest to me. The less unintelligent among you can figure out what I’m after.

This thread is for your stories about Thanksgiving. Or your hopes, plans and dreams for this weekend. Horror stories or great stories, or stories of supreme indifference. What an odd term. Of all the odd couplings in language, you’d never think someone would hook up ‘supreme’ with ‘indifference.’ It doesn’t even make sense when you think about it. (Lofty works better, to my glorious ear.) So don’t. Just tell me your Thanksgiving story, if you have one.

Someone constructed a brilliant post at one of the Gawkers, it was an attack on vile food more or less related to this holiday. Most of its pick I heartily second, most notably green bean casserole and this horrid orange-potato mash topped with marshmallow dung. The devil would boot the latter out of hell for unnecessary roughness, as our football pals say. Trying to turn vegetables into dessert: what could be more christian-midwestern than that? I don’t know, maybe it’s a Southern thing too or actually or originally, but in any case it’s up here for good.

Jezebel has its usual tell-us-your-Thanksgiving-horror-story thread, which always devolves into hate-your-relatives bitchfest. I posted this, since they’re looking for negs:

CatFiveHimmicaneU

One time…long ago…it was Thanksgiving in Maryland, and everywhere else too. It was raining, raining hard. My dad and I drove about 40 miles to a Denny’s. We had sad racetrack turkey slices with mashedish potatoes and congealed greenish gravy. It was a sad, rainy Thanksgiving.

The truth is, although it was superficially miserable, and god only knows why we did an 80-mile roundtripper, I guess out of some sense of dull supposed-to, as whites seem to do most things these days, I somewhat enjoyed the lugubriousness of it all. That cold November rain, though, that can be the most depressing thing on earth. November is the month of death. December is the month of “Gentlemen, start your engines!,” what with the solstice. I love the very last days of December, when you just get a little change in the sun. Like it starts trying again. When it finally turns over. All downhill from there. But late November is as woegegone-dreggy as it gets.

Ok, now for some stomachwarming stuff.

I always liked cranberries. As Fortuna would have it, life afforded me the rare opportunity, some years back, to stay a few days in Massachusetts, with some people with a little land. On their land they had an actual cranberry bog. I spent some time communing with the tiny orbs, really getting to know them. Getting a feel for what they’ve been through as a people. Their successes, their travails, their complaints about working conditions. Generally I found them a happyish lot. No one living in Massachusetts under feet of water can be completely happy as, say, a mite on a liquor vine in Napa, California, but all things considered, their chowder wasn’t going unclammed. Anyway, this amateur cultural fruitologist would say that cranberries are a weird northern vegetable that grow in a sort of lagoon. Precisely the type of thing you wouldn’t step in if it were in La. or Fla. for fear of alligators. They are a kind of underwater berry, creepy in the “Last Dance with Mary Jane” video sense. But boy do they taste great when combined with lots of the poison called refined sugar, altho I, for one, never noticed it behaving any more politely than brown sugar. One of my treasured memories from early VNN is having the chance to credit the great thinker, the white rural genius, who came up with a better machine for harvesting cranberries. Some farmer guy, as I recall. [Ah, here it is.] I love the idea of some white guy just mulling this over for years, and finally hitting on the right solution, which apparently is a means of shaking the underwater bushes so that the berries float to the top, where they are sucked into the metallical maw of BIG CRANBERRY, as Drew Magary would call it.

But now…my story here was, like a child looking at things adult, I always thought there was some sort of magical culinary power required to create cranberries-the-dish. I truly thought it was like some master chef preparation requiring actual gifts and esoteric knowledge. Sometimes it’s more fun to let things remain magical, rather than science them open and find the same old squashed squirrel. Nevertheless, if you want cranberries, and no one’s going to bring them to you, and they’re not going to magically appear, you have to make them. So I looked up a recipe. Turns out I was completely wrong. Cranberries are as easy to make as instant coffee. I was a little sad yet thrilled at the same time. Kind of like having sex for the first time. Homer Simpson wasn’t kidding when he said that bit about food preparation. When you’re a kid, cranberries appear once a year, magically, and ravish you. Just as suddenly they whisk away again, disappearing who knows where for another twelvemonth. Something is gained and lost when we transition from child to adult, from magic to knowledge. The lighter and finer yields to the deeper and stabler, I guess. It’s still sadsome though. Cranberries are sweet with pain, like all good things and great changes in life. Birth, death, knife fights.

C-berries require: 1 cup of orange juice. 1 cup of white sugar. Heat up the orange juice in a pan, stir in the sugar. Then add 12 oz or 16 oz of cranberries. Heat them up till they pop. Watch or they’ll burn over the side! When they start popping, which doesn’t take long, turn off the heat. Pour the pan into a bowl. Let them set. In the spirit of our Puritan ancestors, let them sit in the bowl, cool their round heels, and Think About What They’ve Done. The confining bowl will serve as the Correctional Institute for Hot Berries. There’s a reason they’re in between the color of whore’s lipstick and deep embarrassment. All cranberries should be fried in orange juice daily, to twist the old joke: if you don’t know why, THEY DO. Cranberries do remind me of the lips of a beautiful woman, discreet and whorish at the same time, like all the best ones are. Their color is second only in beauty to peacock’s-neck blue, I would judge it.

That is the it and the all of making delicious cranberries, one of the tartest and tastiest dishes on planets earth and Mars. One of the most beautifully colored too, as, in the words of a successful restaurant owner, “We eat with our eyes, not just our mouth.”

If you walk into a Hy-Vee you can pay around $4 for a name-brand bag of, say, Dole cranberries. Whereas, if you go into economical German-thoroughthunk Aldi, you can pay, as I did the other day, 79c for a 12oz bag! Now THAT is a great price.

I hope you have something good to eat, watch, read, talk to and sleep on this Thanksgiving. As for me, I’m going to eat cranberries till I puke, do some shadowboxing, then eat some more.

Here’s an exciting holiday song to lift your spirits. It’s by the Divinyls, and its very jittery, which is how I feel when a jag’s coming on, when the muse is blowing fecund.

A WASPing We Shall Go

By Alex Linder

Ok…for those who can’t decode WASPing, I’ll cut, copy and explain. Using others’ demise to further our comedic and educational aims is the heart of everything high-minded WASPs DON’T stand for, but it’s also the dead frog-fucking center of everything I DO, so lets embark posthaste.

Such a wonderful spirit.

WASPs have no souls. They have spirits? They have spirits of accountants too gutless to embezzle. Maybe. I mean, I’d bet the other way there too, but I suppose it’s possible.

And of course, if you aren’t on their like list, then you’re mean-spirited. Not wrong. Deficient in some imaginary virtue ‘good’ people (their circle) possess. This is a chickenshit way of moving through the world, but it is their way. I am quite honest when I say the jewish way is preferable to the WASP way. It’s better to be an honest, down-to-earth criminal than whatever it is WASP elite think they are. Again, I’m not talking about Bob Parley in his rotten Ford with his ugly dog, I’m talking about the lacquered and breath-minted elite.

I cannot fathom that my sisterfriend Katherine is gone.

That isn’t tolerable. A rat would emete that shit. Your “sisterfriend”? Jesus Christ Risible.

Future times, in this beautiful life,

WASPs are OBSESSED with using words like HIGH and BEAUTY and SPIRIT (it’s a softer, perfumigated version of Lenin’s PC’s attempt to create a alternative reality via words) – really, all WASP culture is like Mary Baker Eddy + water. I know not even one percent of you will appreciate what I mean viscerally, but perhaps you can grasp it mentally: Mary Baker Eddy’s Science and Health is the WASP mentality raised to the highest degree, or ad nauseam, ad ridiculum, ad abstrusium. Ultimately, by this way of thinking you get to a language in which everything is abstract and, well, glides into and out of everything else, is perfectly transitive. All becomes one. It’s the most frustrating thing in the world to read and try to make sense of. Well, anyone with sense can make it for nonsense with a few minutes’ review, but you still might have to go to Sunday School for a good many years. Anyway, this high-minded gunk, for proper WASP elite are never anything else, creates a cultic atmosphere that is appealing to many or even most elite women, and far too many elite men. They create an atmosphere through their use of words, and a milieu through their actions and connections and institutions. If you don’t speak, act and think like they do, and there are very good reasons not to, they will discover you and ostracize you. They are the opposite of a relaxed, reality-based community; they are rather a cult of high-minded strivers and seekers who call what they do service. They do well by doing good, as they see it. They might say because.

we would have experienced together over the coming years, growing older, will never happen. Ideas and projects that we would have helped each other create have gone silent. I will miss her warmth, humor, and brilliance.

Gauche as a prole’s personal ad. The woman willingly spent her life studying and rising in a cult built on slitting animal throats as a way to propitiate the higher powers. Real friggin’ noble.

Future laughter and wit in duet now deflected or echoing alone. The only way forward is to tend to the special lights that she emitted, and kindled in others. We love you Katherine. Thank you Pomona College for being her professional home for so many years.

Hmm…I suspect her bioluminescence were due to fungal infection, perhaps contracted from one of the donkeys this bongo-whapper assassinated. One of the risks of the trade.

facilitate class discussion better than anyone I have ever had teach me

That’s a good compliment; she can be posthumously proud of that one. … How WASP of me. I included a positive remark to feign even-handedness. The real me thinks these students praising her class discussions liked her ditching of solid academic work for braindead femalical jibber-jabber.

She had the gift of completely validating and accepting a person for what they are while at the same time encouraging them to be better.

You are awesome, mmkay? But if you were awesome and bathed regularly…holy shit man…Has the chart got a position ABOVE number one??

Katherine deeply influenced my teaching. At a workshop for new faculty
at Pomona College ten years ago, Katherine had all of us sitting in a circle
playing different African drums, some loud and others quiet. We each had a rhythm
to play. Initially our drumming was a frantic mess. She showed us in a dramatic
fashion how important it is to leave the pauses between phrases empty, so that
the other drum voices could be heard. Whenever there is a pause in one of my
class discussions, I remember Katherine and resist the urge to fill the quiet
with my own voice. So often the voices of students that are not often heard come
forth at those moments. I am so thankful to Katherine for helping me to make
space for those voices.

That’s called antiphony, nigger! It’s damn good too, as the niggers do it, listen to a Farrakhan speech. Listen to a Goyfire.

Words cannot describe our collective loss.

Oh yes they can. Words can describe anything. For example, your bottom looks like a exploded beanbag chair collected in a discount shopping bag.

I still can’t wrap my mind around this.

I know, man. The bornin’ papers clearly stated everyone gets to live to 92 in perfect health, so what-t-f gives with dying at 52?? We need to appeal this to some federal coroners’ court.

Professor Hagedorn was a beautiful mind and a

There it is: the WASP’s highest of holies: a beautiful mind. That term is catnip to them, what they aspire to, what they award each other. Remember Barbarba Bush’s not troubling “my beautiful mind” with the horrors of (Afghanistan). I’ve never understood how a mind can be beautiful. The concept is non-cognizant, as the pretentious like to say. It is people who throw around garbage terms like this who are very often the practitioners of the lowest forms of scumbaggery, just as it is very often the people who proclaim their love of animals (another WASP stereotype) who are shittiest to actual humans. As a writer accurately summed up WASPS, they love dogs and hate people. The whole thing is just eddied Eddy: if we pretend bad things don’t exist, or anything/one we don’t like doesn’t exist, then it goes away. Reality is determined by us! Reality is a social construct. And they’ve done all they could to make it so. All cults are like this. Realitarians are hated and need not apply, and if admitted and discovered, given the order of the boot. My mom graduated from Pomona. She wanted one of her children to go there. I did. If Pomona had had inkling of my views, granted not as fully formed on entrance as exit, I would never have been admitted – and the Dean of Admissions more or less said this straight out in a hostile LTE back when I was Opinions Ed. at the student paper. This cult loves niggers and hates sniggers. Ah, who’m I kidding. I was the bad guy, and I loved it, just like Tony Montana. This cult gots money and power, but it also gots nothing. Big heaping scoops of pissant nothing.

There is only one term WASPs love more than ‘beautiful mind,’ and that is…enrichment. My college president, David Alexander, among the dead, who will figure in this thread, believe you me, was enamored of this word. If this word could have been animatronicized into a vinyl doll he would have left his wife for it. He could not write a speech, hell a paragraph in a speech without using it. I always thought it was a real tell to where his mind lay. It honestly came off to me, with ears to laugh at it, like a Dickens character or a Butler character (The Way of All Flesh, remember the College of Spiritual Pathology). Everything enriches us, but we never touch on money, altho Dollar is our God and Dollar is our every waking thought. WASP’s god is MONEY. He loves money like that ad dog loves BACON! But he can’t admit this directly, so he has to come up with useful terms such as enrichment like a sort of e’erlit verbal candle one might buy in one of those womeny smell ‘n’ cards Stores of Niceness. It’s enough to make a sane grown man chew on oleander, which is poisonous, for the arboreally disinclined among you.

helped me see music in a way that I’d never imagined it

Get a little suspicious at this sort of encomium, which is repeated through these letters. I suspect it might tinge into the political here, with them evaluating music by its ancestry rather than its, well, quality. A PC version of Twain’s wholly justified snipe on Wagner: It’s better than it sounds. I have a feeling that Guangian Throat Clearing fits that bill pretty neatly.

I remember every class period of Music 11

Geezus. No one remembers every class period of anything, even a seminar on Advanced Vampirology taught by Jebus himself. A phrase I can’t quite remember fits here; this just goes beyond necessary exaggeration.

Katherine taught me the value of my own musical story, that there was a connection between learning and meaning. She encouraged me to stay close to my roots and to let my work find me

Yeah, that was a tactful way of saying the oboe escaped you, my darling; lay back and await your mate and metier, the noble kazoo. Rooty-toot toot! Woot!

These are all so close in spirit as the queer waiter who said to my table, essaying the sensuous, “I’ll be right back with some warm bread and some cold water,” a phrase that sparkled me for decades. By these I mean, taught me the value of my own musical story; like a painting that needs to be explained. Dopey broad, if your music has value, it’s self-explanatory. Your burbling will hardly enrich it. she seemed to key into what each student cared about, even if we didn’t know it ourselves … That just verges on satire, makes the writer sound like a mind fit for Romper Room. Alt translation is this broad sucked after positive student evaluations, was afraid to kick students in the ass or send their tin ears to the recycling center. You can just see her handing this broad a triangle, “Here, this might be a little more your speed, mmkay?”

helped me see music in a way that I’d never imagined it. What I’ll remember most are her potlatch suppers, usually featuring African vegetarian dishes, often based on beans. When the inevitable gas leak occurred, she giggled and called it found music.

Jesus. You can’t make this stuff up. The she-Seinfeld of Grouse College.

Coming to terms with her loss—if this is even possible—will take us all a long time.

I feel like the girl in Vacation when Chevy Chase is painting the lily re the dead aunt.

the gift of music, the heart beating darkly. The topic was one thing, but what counted was the personal connection, the sense that thinking through music should be equal in complexity, vitality, and mystery to its subject

Really? Then why did she study third-world music? Has that species produced anything remotely as complex and nuanced as the white west? Isn’t that pounding beat characteristic of music at its lowest, with nothing but limbic lust to express?

Beautiful person, beautiful mind, beautiful spirit, beautifully put – I defy anyone to tell me this unwitting repetition of these locutions of high-mindedness as they think of it is not characteristic of a cult. Repeating its mantra. They honestly are not aware of what they’re doing, or how weird it is when you look at it objectively, or instinctively find it unappealing rather than appealing.

People these days are all about experiences, having them, collecting them, undergoing them, but it seems these seldom produce any interesting thoughts. A little in this world, any sector thereof, goes a very long way. If you know how to grind it up and make meal out of it.

Then at the bottom, from unrelated article ‘beautifully written style,’ jesus, it never ends with these people.

Pomona Laments Passing of Haruspex Hagedorn

By Alex Linder

[ The following is from a forum thread posting. ]

I will write the following in my favorite tongue, near English. If ebonics be legit, then mebonics be legitter. I declare I will practice sociology without a license. Unsafe sociology is the best kind, it nearly goes without saying. I will divine from signs, like a haruspex, but working dry. This is a Pomona professoress, recently deceased. Her name is Hagedorn, pretty sure that’s German, not jewish, from New Jersey, into Santeria, of all things. This is the odd sort of creature liberalism abounds with. German-descended liberals mesh very nicely with English-descended libs. Germans have always been known for traveling around, sniffing things, and a certain strain of this impulse routinely throws up creatures like La Hagedorn.

http://discussions.latimes.com/20/la…rn-20131119/10

Katherine Hagedorn dies at 52; Pomona professor was Santeria priestess

Katherine Hagedorn, a longtime music professor at Pomona College in Claremont, became a Santeria priestess after years of studying sacred bata drums.


Look at the look on the dark girl’s face – that’s your classic ‘minority’ (that aint) responding to your overly intelligent, caring, helpful white liberal. If you were a mud, you wouldn’t like white people either – although you’d damn sure like their bodies and what they put together for themselves, as Sam Kinison put it.

By David Colker

November 18, 2013, 10:39 a.m.

Katherine Hagedorn was not your stereotypical priestess in the Cuba-based Santeria religion, known for its complex, ecstatic drumming that adherents believe can call forth deities.

She grew up in New Jersey, was white, had a doctorate in music and was a longtime popular professor at Pomona College.

But as a graduate student on a cold, rainy day at Brown University in 1988, she spotted a poster for an upcoming performance by an Afro-Cuban ensemble of drummers and dancers. The performance changed her life.

Quote:

“From the moment the drummers struck their instruments, I was stunned,” Hagedorn wrote in her 2001 book, “Divine Utterances: The Performance of Afro-Cuban Santeria.” “Each delicate stroke seemed to hit my solar plexus, and I was immediately embarrassed lest anyone guess how intimately I was experiencing the sound. I could not breathe normally.”

Hagedorn traveled to Cuba, studied with masters of sacred bata drums, and after a decade of practice and study, became initiated into Santeria as a priestess. It was a journey from academic objectivity to total involvement in a world that once seemed entirely foreign to her.

“My wide-angle lens of folkloric performance,” she wrote, “had suddenly zoomed in to the close-up focus of personally experienced religious performance.”

Hagedorn died Nov. 12 at home in Claremont after a long struggle with cancer, said Pomona College. She was 52, and had been part of the school’s music faculty since 1993.

Drumming was just one of several topics she taught at the school. She also oversaw the Balinese Gamelan ensemble and taught courses in gender in music, performance traditions of the African diaspora and protest music. Her classes were emphatically participatory, not to mention loud.

“If we are learning about West African music, if we’re reading about it, listening to it, we’re playing it too,” she said in a 2001 Pomona College Magazine article. “Same with Tuvan throat singing and Balinese Gamelan. I try to get the students to do it.”

In 2000, Hagedorn was named California Professor of the Year by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and the Council for Advancement and Support of Education.

She’s red-stamped “good” by the System. Nothing more Systemic than Carnegie Foundation.

Katherine Johanna Hagedorn was born Oct. 16, 1961, in Summit, N.J. Her undergraduate degree was from Tufts University, with a triple major in Spanish, Russian and English studies, plus a minor in classical piano. She earned a master’s degree in international relations from John Hopkins University and a master’s and doctorate from Brown in ethnomusicology.

Now that’s very interesting. Many do not know that New Jersey has plenty of rural area, and plenty of people of German descent, as well as the Italians and jews everyone knows about. Now, the fact that Hagedorn went to Tufts is very interesting, as this is a jewish college. Not all Tufts students are jews. It makes my theory Hagedorn is German rather than jewish less likely, but I still would guess it’s the case. The way she wears her hair, in the photo, and her dress, suggest it. The way she gathers her hands suggests Germanic plainscrub piety, rather than jewish accusatory meddling-hectoring. It is clear this unadorned Hagedorn’s a rather plain but intelligent white applemeat woman. And it is a guess. Altho her concerns touch on the leftist litany, the feminism etc doesn’t appear to be the driving force. She probably belongs to the group that assimilates the going ideals and agenda without any internal objections. Her interest in Santeria and its oinks was no doubt genuine; more that Hagedorn’s peculiar interests fit The Agenda, were useful to the System, than that she was an aggressive driver.

In 1989, she made the first of many trips to Cuba to study bata drums, which are played in sets of three. “The only way you can learn to play those things is to be taught by someone who is an expert, who is consecrated,” said Raul Fernandez, professor of Latin American studies at UC Irvine. “They knew she was honest and truly interested, not there on some capricious whim.”

I remember being in some hall at Pomona, and hearing some earnest liberal say something on the order of, “every time I hear drums, I feel like I’m stealing black culture.” I did not grow up among this type; statements like this were the first time I knew it existed. That is, I knew liberals existed from reading the newspaper, but to catch the real flavor of this type and its mindset, have to hear it first-ear.

She completed her first step of initiation into Santeria about a year after her studies of the bata drum began, but then took each subsequent step only after “much trepidation” and self-examination, “shying away from what appeared to be my religious calling,” she wrote in her book.

This is why we call liberals onionskins. All this sensitivity. These tears. These trembling vacillations. Yet they turn into great hostile white sharks if you cross them. Crossing them could mean harshly, as in mocking with laughter, or merely softly, with plain honest rational questions. You’ll receive dark return. You’ll learn, as all before you, that liberals have endless boundless love of their inferiors — roughly, all muds and white deviants — and boundless hatred of all their equals – whites and other intelligent folk who don’t think the way they do. Invisible plantations and invisible apartheid are their preferred forms. Where a white man, a right man, builds a real-world segregation system based on rational reasons; a liberal creates an invisible empire based on irrational hatreds.

Back to the story – what on earth would Haggy be trepidatin’ about? What’s not to love about Santeria? It sounds colorful and delicious, like a scooped-out watermelon filled with delicious and colorful mixed fruits. Or like a gutter gushing with delicious red Kool-Aid recently liberated from the throat of an uninnocent yardfowl. Ah, but that’s why I can’t be a liberal. That’s why I failed to cult up like a real softspoken man of the world. My plebeian need to guffaw (a guffaw is a fart to these people), my boorish insistence on the actually-real were too great. How could Katy’s delicate emotional conscience handle the rude combo of spicy drums and exsanguinated roosters? Well, we don’t know that, we can’t enter a plain woman’s heart. We can only know the outcome. I divine from the ether that the soft, noble soul of La Hagedorn was in her delicate, sensitiver-than-sensitive way essaying a new branch of Santeria; poking out a new vein of the Old Thing like a watercolorist with his thin swirled brush eking out a new brown tree branch. A new vein that would sacrifice date palms, or ground nuts, or some other native African vegetable, rather than meaty breathers. It’s not easy being a liberal. No one ever said that. But with enough patience, sensitivity, imagination, sighs, grants, fellowships, and Gone-Fishing signs over the eyelids, one can overcome the obstacles and unite the opposites. Some thought crimes law doesn’t hurt either. Makes it all cohere, you know. Like corn starch in your cooking pot.

When she finally became a priestess, she wore a special outfit for the occasion. It had tiny figures believed to represent vegetarian Santeria priests sacrificing avocados and pineapples on ex-sanguinary altars. Goats that formerly would have been the star of the show now allowed to lick the spilled juices after the service. Friends say she had her gorgeous raiment hand-sewn by an Equitorial Guinean sewing circle microbusiness she encountered on a research trip to Central Africa.

“It’s the dress she will be wearing when she is buried,” said her friend Margaret Waller, a professor of French at Pomona.

Hagedorn is survived by her husband, Terry Ryan, a professor at Claremont Graduate University’s Center for Information Systems & Technology; a son, Gabriel; her parents, Fred and Grace Hagedorn; and her sister Martha Hagedorn-Krass.

Further evidence Hagedorn was probably German rather than jewess.

david.colker@latimes.com

She does not whiff jewish, going by her particulars. Now, the interesting thing here is how this apparently mild woman would have felt about the thing most associated with Santeria – the thing it’s known for: animal sacrifices. One wonders if anyone anywhere ever pressed her on this, how she felt about it. I highly doubt it. Many things evil when white men do them are noble or at least not-to-be-mentioned when darkies do ’em. Sniffing these fine differences is what makes the liberal a connoisseur.

http://www.latimes.com/obituaries/la…#ixzz2ln5ELhmL

Crushing Opposition Is Not Enough; Jews Must Make Opposition Impossible to Form – By Destroying White Bodies, Minds and Characters

 

By Alex Linder

[The following is taken from a forum thread. ]

Jimmy Marr: I’ve seen this idea from you before, but it always seems to be presented in a slightly tangential manner like above. Can you develop it a little more here, or refer me to something elsewhere.

I kinda get it, and I think it’s very important, but I could benefit from further elucidation.

Is it the public schools’ refusal to teach phonetic reading technique that accomplishes the “mind binding”? How so?

It’s my fault I’ve never marketed my writing particularly. I’m sure I’ve written fairly directly on this before, and I’m sure I could search all night and not find it.

What you refer to is an important concept, and easily explained.

There are different levels of things. One is easy to see. Others are subtle, secondary – but even more dangerous, even stronger.

Ok, so I’m an evil jew. I want to fuck up little Jimmy Marr’s head. How do I do it?

The crudest, most obvious way: I create public schools. I force JM’s parents to pay a ‘public school’ tax, or whatever I call it. I force young master JM to attend classes all day, like a day jail. In those classes I harangue him, I brainwash him, I boss him around, I ring bells at him, I make him march, I whistle at him, I make him wear ugly clothes, and square dance and if he points his finger like a gun, I call the cops. If he moves more than once an hour, I send him to the school nurse, refer him to the school shrink, get him on drugs. I stamp out any signs of masculinity, badthink or initiative. I make him docile, pliant, compliant, scared – I put fear and passivity in him, as much as I can.

But we get ahead of ourselves.

I can abuse you by brainwashing you. By telling you what you have to believe. By rewarding you if you parrot my line. And by punishing you if you don’t.

That is the obvious intellectual terrorism (that our schools engage in).

But the LESS obvious is more interesting and more important.

As someone said, in every society there’s an orthodoxy, and if you fall afoul of it, you’ll suffer. That’s unrelated to jew-specific political correctness, it’s just an innate human tendency to groupthink and groupact and groupjudge. PC is simply a much harsher manifestation this tendency can be forced to to take, a channel it can be forced into. As opposed to, say, a Catholic society under Franco where you suffer if you get divorced, or wear a bikini at a public beach. That Is Not Done, and people look down on you.

So there’s the top level – teaching us the party line. And punishing us if we disagree: here’s what you must believe. Here’s the state religion. Here’s what we’re going to do to you if you resist.

Easy to grasp. There’s a partyline, set down by the powers that be, and you’d better believe it, or you will suffer.

The jews have achieved this power over us, to where they can set lines and dictate.

But they aren’t content with that.

They don’t just want no opposition, they want opposition not even to be possible. Not even to occur to people. Not even to be capable of forming.

That requires second-level operations. Beyond brainwashing/parroting. It requires salting the fields of Carthage, or destroying the machine-tool shop. It requires binding minds. And deforming character.


The ideal Aryan, according to the jews of the Frankfurt School

Any qualities of mind or character that can lead to independence, to continence, to self-control, essentially, for lack of a better word, can lead to jew-opposition. The jew would prefer you behave like the person in the cartoon above, from the story here. Remember the backdrop here: the Frankfurt school. Jews believe Aryan males are inherently ‘authoritarian personalities.’ This personality tends to lead to jew-opposition. Well ordered minds lead to well ordered lives and well ordered families in well ordered communities – in which the jew and the barrier-breaking and social destruction he prides himself on are unappealing and looked down upon. So this personality must be excised or thwarted or deformed. How is this done?

By character, it’s done by promoting sexual laxness – promiscuity. This is why everything is hypersexualized in the anti-white media. Sex changes from a private matter of bonding and reproduction to a matter of public titillation and obsessions. This is why a host never discusses jewish power without getting a pink slip but is perfectly free to ramble on for hours about masturbation. Remember what the wise man said: they take your political freedom, your independence, and give you sexual license in exchange. That’s been borne out over the 20th century.

By mind, it’s done by teaching reading by a method that frustrates the student. Getting him to hate reading. Reading, after all, is the gate through which almost all learning must enter. So let’s get the dirty little shaigetz and shiksa to associate it with pain. This is the ‘look-say’ method of reading instruction, where English is taught as Chinese – as thousands of different word-pictures, rather than a small set of letters (26) and sounds (roughly 70), whereby new words can be decoded, sounded out, they dont have to be memorized and remembered.

If the purpose of a public school is to educate children, why is the main means of education (beyond personal experience) — reading — taught by a method KNOWN NOT TO WORK? How can that possibly be? There’s only one answer: thwarting the ability to read and the desire to read is the real mission of the ‘teachers.’ It takes roughly 100 hours of instruction in the three Rs to produce a student capable of the basics – which are all he needs to learn anything else he needs. 100 hours is a few weeks. But public schools endure for sixteen years! And most victims go on to ‘college.’ The mission of this institution is clearly something other than the ostensible.

Public school is a funhouse – nothing is what it appears to be. From the name on down, it’s a bunch of lies. The only purpose of the public school is to create stunted cretins who look to the state (produced by ZOG) to solve all their problems. The exact opposite of what America was created, as a political structure, to do, which was basically defend the coasts, and leave the people alone.

Basically, what I’m saying is that the jews go beyond simply putting out a propaganda line and enforcing agreement, they and their institutions actively work to destroy any ostensibly neutral intellectual or character faculties that they know will tend to produce ‘anti-semites,’ simply because they produce thinking, initiative-taking agents.

In my life, I’ve read more than anyone who’s not a working academic, I’d suppose. The one and only time I came close to really hating to read was in junior high, when we were assigned Shane. The book the movie is based on. Very interesting stuff. But we had to write a synopsis of every stupid three chapters. It was absolutely boring and awful. And that was the intent. Even an interesting book can be made horrible by this kind of approach. What they’re trying to do is get people to hate and avoid that icky reading stuff, and leave it to the trained perfessionals. let them do the thinking and the heavy lifting. Just content yourself with shitty pop fiction, if you must read. Leave the hardback books to the jews, the intellectuals, the leaders. Your job is to watch sports, jerk off to jew-produced porn, and obey, obey, obey.

Now obviously the jews cant destroy all other intelligence. But they’d like to. If they are ever able to locate what the jews call ‘hate’ or ‘racism’ in white brains, jews will lobby Congress to pass a law mandating ‘hate’ lobotomies. If you or anyone think I am kidding, you don’t understand how jews think and operate. Short of literally cutting out pieces of white men’s brains, jews can fuck up children’s heads by creating a reverse reality in the mass media they alone control, and foster a hatred of thinking and reading, a hard-core anti-intellectualism, among the public schools whose teachers have been trained by marxist jews through the college system.

Besides teaching reading, the basic intellectual tool, by methods that don’t work, in order to frustrate and retard students’ intellectual growth, jews also attack agency in their language. They encourage students to participate, unwittingly, in their own character deformation and physical destruction. The latter through encouraging race mixing with muds, who are lower IQ and violent, all around less desirable, and characterwise by obsessing about their own looks and self-esteem, and coming to believe that their own opinion is somehow valuable in its own right, rather than valuable insofar as it corresponds to something in the real world. ‘Students,’ or victims of public schools, are trained to become selfish, passive clones. Public schools serve the agenda of the jews perfectly, but they also serve the agenda of giant corporations trying to stifle developments from bright individuals. This in fact, if you read the leftists like Gatto, was a huge influence on the American public school system from the late 1800s on. Of course, he is ignorant or doesn’t mention the jewish/state agenda, because leftists prefer to blast corporations, as you know.

All kinds of research confirms what I’m saying. The problem is that nearly all explanations of the type I’m attempting here come from christians or former schoolteachers or neocon goys. They are fine as far as they go, but they leave out the jewish heart of the problem – today. Jews were not involved at the start of this problem, which goes back, in America, to a set of Protestant nuts in Massachusetts, but the system those moralizing control-freak zanies created fit jewish needs perfectly when they came to America and began propagating their poison through Columbia Teachers College, which is the one the other schools of education around the country take their bearing from. E. Michael Jones covers some of this. Christian homeschooling writers have their angle. Former PS teacher John Gatto has his semi-leftist anti-corporate approach. And of course we have our WN approach, we incorporates what we know about jews, specifically their hatred of whites, their belief that the way to destroy us is through promoting social looseness, particularly regarding sex.

So in conclusion, of course jews smack down direct opposition as hate, and use their institutions to produce parrots and weaklings. But it goes beyond that. They seek to destroy the white man in body, mind, and character – and they use the institutions they control, in a coordinated way, to do just this.

Loose sex – spreads disease. Weakens bodies. Reduces reproduction. Weakens family ties. Exhibits a ratchet effect or multiplier over generations. To children never conceived, no children can be born. To children perverted into homosexual behavior, no children will be born. To children dead of AIDS, or made barren by chlamydia, no children will be born. So it is with drinking and drugs. People fucked up on them will have fewer and worse families. People who race mix will have inferior families, less threatening to jews because of their inferior behavior and lower mental ceilings, compared to white families. The more mixed families there are, the harder for white families to maintain their success rates and success patterns. The laws, media and schools are all worked to create what jews would call a ‘hostile environment for whites’ if the sides were reversed. Everything is done to make solid white society impossible and, barring that, undesirable.

Destroy the character of a man – get him hooked on vices, drugs, sex, rock ‘n’ roll. Get him to accede in lies – this is the real purpose of PC. It destroys character. Tens of millions of white men are knowing going along with statements about diversity they know aren’t true. In an anti-intellectual culture as the jews have created in AmeriKwa, this seems like no big deal. We all lie a little. But it is a big deal. Integrity does mean something. You can’t continually accede in lies and keep a solid charcter. The jews know this. That’s why they’re so hot to make sure that no esteemed public figure ever gets away with saying something unPC. Example is the discoverer of DNA, forced to resign and apologize because he voiced an accurate generalization about black mental aptitudes. We’re a society far gone when our heroes give in like that, and we sit by and watch and do nothing. We’re in a dark age, made dark by our cowardice, more than any other factor. The jews aren’t so smart. They do dominate us though. Why? Because we are afraid of them. We have chosen to be cowards. We should be ashamed of ourselves. But we’re not. Jews have promoted a culture of shamelessness, we can note.

Intellectually – we’ve been over this. They train us to read by methods that don’t work. So we’re smart enough to read a menu at a Macdonald’s but no smarter. We don’t want to read anything serious. We don’t want any serious thoughts. We want to watch tv, cheer football teams, be satisfied with the utterly jejune and reality-reverse stereotyping in any pop fiction we read during our annual week at the beach. We are consumers. We are unindividuated individuals. We are voters. We are democrats. We are clowned clowns who don’t realize what’s been taken from us under our nose. We are fools and idiots who think we’re free and independent agents. We are pathetic.

The notion of agency is what triggered all this. Free will. Who is responsible for human actions? Individual men, or social forces and fate? Most people say the first but believe the second. The interests of the jews and the state dovetail. They both find an interest in promoting the idea that people need the state to serve their needs. Jews play on and off agency as suits their purpose. Nigs are never guilty of their actions. White (nationalists) are always responsible – not just for their own actions but for the actions of the blacks they ‘hate’ too! I’m not exaggerating. This is exactly how the jewsmedia plays it. For example, any white murdered by a nigger he said anything the jew can construe as epithet to is responsible for what happens to him. Jews also like to blame WN for their own destruction, implying or stating its because of their ideals they are brought low. They are trying to get whites to think: if you hold these beliefs, bad things will inevitably happen to you. Yeah – because of jews. Jews do bad things, but hide their hand. Most goyim are religious idiots. Another example is the meme among christards that “god blesses those who help Israel, and hurts those who don’t.” Jews play with agency and responsibility as serves their purpose, and they enlist or enmist their ins and outs with secular-religious mumbo-jumbo. Same with homosexuality. It’s a noble and moral thing when two queers want to go public or get married, but it’s also a thing of scandal if one of their enemies is revealed to indulge in the behavior. Jews turn everything to their purpose. What is most damaging to Aryans generally, to anyone generally, is what they do in their schools: teach against concepts of agency. Downtalk enterprise (business, free markets), talk up service and ‘needs’ and ‘victims’ and ‘legacies.’ No one is ever responsible for his actions until he opposes the jews, then he’s responsible for everything. This is the white man as guilty class. As some have pointed out, the white man takes the place of the capitalist in marxist ideology. Like a witch, he’s capable of every sort of evil, and no stone goes unturned in discovering his evil pale hand.

These thoughts are quick and not as well organized as they could be, but let me try yet another summing:

The first level is to tell you what to believe.

The deeper level is to deny you the tools to reason rightly yourself. So that you can’t even form wrong opinion, wrong meaning perceived-as-dangerous-by-jews. This second, deeper level is achieved by the coordinated use of the major institutions of society to create a milieu that is White-uncomfortable to white-impossible and meant to lead to the deepest and final level: white-nonexistence, as declared for quite openly by jew Ignatiev, among others. Also involved, at the instrumental level, are the use of certain techniques to warp the mind, such as the look-say method of ‘teaching reading.’ All this is wrapped, of course, in the smothering plastic of ‘gaslighting,’ whereby none of what is going on is ever spoken about, or admitted when charged, or acknowledged in any way. Studies have shown people sweat bullets when they disagree with a few others on the length of a pencil, so how in the world can they brave the rare perception that something as profound and awful as what I describe is actually happening when no one around them ever says anything! But it is happening, it is by design, and it is intended to warp and confuse our people, and to lead, ultimately, to their disappearance from the face of the earth. Christ – which jewish ‘holiday’ – literally holy day – is NOT a celebration of another race’s genocide! That right there ought to tell us something.

Let me try it again. Jews don’t just tell you the right things to say and believe, they don’t just give your the lines to parrot, they do their level best to destroy your moral character and your ability to reason. And they have overwhelming media and public-institutional control behind them.

Is said Great minds think alike. Better said, minds functioning correctly arrive in the same place. They may not feel the same about the destination their right-reasoning leads to, but they will end up at the same conclusion. That’s what makes reason reason, and what makes it pro-social, as opposed to anti-social religion.

Destroying the reasoning capacity of competing races is ‘good for jews.’ Not just filling heads with bad and self-destructive ideas, but preventing heads from thinking at all. That’s where their safety lies. Next to getting rid of competing races physically and entirely via genocide. Anyone who can think and who applies his thinking mechanism to a study of jewish behavior will reach the same conclusions I have expressed about what jews are doing. He may not then draw the conclusion I have – that we should fight back against the jews and the world they’re trying to create, but he won’t be able honestly or rationally to deny that my description of their behavior and motives fits their historical record, and is demonstrably manifest in what they actually do in daily life. This fact – that what they call ‘antisemitism’ is one very likely reaction, the normal reaction I have said, to their proven historical pattern of behavior – represents a threat to jews, potentially even an existential threat to them, if I can persuade enough people my solutio to the threat they pose to Aryans and other goyim is best — and they are not going to sit there while even the POTENTIAL for opposition exists.

Jews have mostly destroyed their real opponents. Now they are worried about potential opponents. You certainly won’t learn the truth about jews in the schools they control by indoctrinating the education majors who become the teachers, you will only learn the truth about jews by either dealing with jews directly, which is likelier to give you indigestion than comprehensive intellectual understanding, or by reading certain material, and thinking your way to a conclusion. This kind of intelligence is rare enough, but by deliberately making public education about socialization rather than intellectual development, jews can shrink the pool of potential ‘anti-semites’ as they call them. Here they work hand in glove with the non-jew Deweyites who, in America at least, preceded them and, as it were, set the table for them. Dewey wanted cogs for a central-government bureaucrats serving a new world order; jews want cogs and clones for their own reasons – so they can rule and everyone else can serve them as retarded, mixed-race slaves. The public school system serves both agendas – the racist jews and the anti-racist NWO WASP-Anglomanic high-minded universalist one-worlder crowd.

So jews have two theaters of operations:

Lies and lie-enforcement (hate crimes law, thought crimes enforcement)

and

Destruction of hostile intelligence, real or potential. The fewer ‘anti-semites’ there are in the world, the fewer men, parties, publications, the easier to defame and destroy them; the more, the harder. Beyond this, they work on sowing the fields with salt. That means anti-intellectual education focused on social attitudes rather than genuine learning as the basis of public education. That’s been going on in America since the 1920s, at least. That’s the notion of progressive education, which jews have adapted to their own ends, so that little white kids-to-be-mentally-warped are force-fed Anne Frank in both history and English.

Whatever traditional i.e. real education promotes – intellectual and character Bildung, basically – jew-controlled public ‘education’ works to destroy. Destroy the body with promiscuity, destroy the character with by encouraging or forcing accession in known lies, (instruct the youth of the goyim in doctrines WE KNOW TO BE FALSE, as the jews say in Protocols), and destroy the mind by focusing it on base things and personal details and attitude-striking rather than genuine factual learning about the real external world.

The fruit of jews’ labor is to produce grabbag mixed-race 90-IQ helots with no idea who they are, living in a world dominated by racist jews who know exactly what they are.

On Language – Reticent vs Reluctant

By Alex Linder

[ The following is from a forum thread posting. ]

Remember above all, chilluns, language is a form of music, meant to entertain others, to seduce them, to elucidate things for them. We learn the rules not just in order to obtain the fruits of following them – ease, ease that comes from effective communication of ideas and meaning – but, for we of the advanced arts, in order to break them. For breaking the rules runs by rules too, as per jew Zimmerman’s ‘to live outside the law you must be honest’

Absolutely_Sweet_Marie Absolutely_Sweet_Marie

(which I didn’t know till I looked up this link is a line he adapted from a movie). Escaping hierarchy and structure and discipline isn’t possible, except to unseasoned sophomore at Silly State shlooking socialist sophist Sol’s semitic slivovitz. If we break the rules without knowing them, without understanding why it’s better to break than to observe them, sensing where they need and cry to be broken, to serve a higher purpose, then we are crude and without art or understanding. The default must be to observe the rules, in language as in society. One cannot observe rules one isn’t familiar with, and it is the entire enterprise of public schools, at least since Dewey, to play down the rules, to pretend they don’t exist, to make them secondary to the students’ self-esteem. Why are they called students if they study only to feel good about themselves? Dewey was a pre-Frankfurter, an echt WASP pervert, and one of the foremost non-jew destroyers of America, 20th century collection. It is a part of our mission here to repair his damage, which propagates even today through his legions of education-major dolts known incorrectly as teachers through institutions known incorrectly as public schools. I will be conducting these column classes from time to time, whenever I have enough fodder from my scourings to make a piece. It is our intention to imbue those deficient with appreciation for the lightness of verbal rebellion, where called for, for rebellion in words as in life is a duty like other duties, and for Germanical precision for the ordinariety that is 98.32% of waking life. Perk your ears, parallel your heels, and nicht rausfallen, mein sponges.

Let me put these out there as general guides. If you’re a prole of the usual sort, your job is to understand and comply with the rules. You can achieve that goal.

If you are a bourgeois who knows the rules, your job is see if you have any wings. See if you have some art. Not to walk down the long country highway, with your wings furled on your back, pointing out potholes, but to run and jump and try to fly. Verily I say unto ye of little comprehension, not getting things wrong is not the same as getting things right. Not getting things wrong is good enough for proles, it’s a genuine achievement. But not for abler folk. Of course, we all need brushing up, me included. As I run across stuff I’ve forgotten or never knew, I’ll find it in here.

1. Nouns accreting ys

Lately, seen both resiliency and competency used – both are wrong, even though the dictionary says the former is acceptable.

Quote:
resilience [ri-zil-yuhns, -zil-ee-uhns]
noun
1.
the power or ability to return to the original form, position, etc., after being bent, compressed, or stretched; elasticity.
2.
ability to recover readily from illness, depression, adversity, or the like; buoyancy.
Also, resiliency.

Origin:
1620–30; < Latin resili(ēns), present participle of resilīre to spring back, rebound (see resilient) + -ence

The right use is resilience, not resiliency, it doesn’t sound right. That y is like seeing green mold on your bread. Eww, get it off, nasty encrustation.

Quote:
competence [kom-pi-tuhns]
noun

1. the quality of being competent; adequacy; possession of required skill, knowledge, qualification, or capacity: He hired her because of her competence as an accountant.

2. sufficiency; a sufficient quantity.

3. an income sufficient to furnish the necessities and modest comforts of life.

4. Law. (of a witness, a party to a contract, etc.) legal capacity or qualification based on the meeting of certain minimum requirements of age, soundness of mind, citizenship, or the like.

5. Embryology. the sum total of possible developmental responses of any group of blastemic cells under varied external conditions.

2. Reluctant vs reticent

Here’s a common misuse, from story about possible nigger rapist and the college football culture (in this case FSU) that produces and cossets this type:

“I was very reticent to fail a football player, because I didn’t want to be harassed,”
http://deadspin.com/jameis-winston-i…eac-1467707410

This is a flat wrong, but quite common, use of reticent. The word she means and should use is reluctant. Dictionaries may get weak on this point, but we cannot allow feebleminded proles and indulgent lexicographers to frogmarch this perfectly useful and necessary word behind the dusty iron bars of desuetude. If one could say what he means with the term unwilling, then reluctant may be the right choice. There’s a subtle difference between unwilling and reluctant. Unwilling sets a stronger line; reluctant implies there is an obstacle to one’s doing what another party desires, but that obstacle might be removed, in which case one’s reluctance might disappear. By contrast one’s reticence does not disappear, since it is a hard-wired trait, not a passing feeling or fleeting disposition.

Quote:

reluctant [ri-luhk-tuhnt]
adjective
1.
unwilling; disinclined: a reluctant candidate.
2.
struggling in opposition.

Quote:

ret·i·cent [ret-uh-suhnt] Show IPA
adjective
1.
disposed to be silent or not to speak freely; reserved.
2.
reluctant or restrained.
Origin:
1825–35; < Latin reticent- (stem of reticēns ), present participle of reticēre to be silent, equivalent to re- re- + -tic-, combining form of tacēre to be silent (cf. tacit) + -ent- -ent

Can be confused: 1. reluctant, reticent (see synonym study at reluctant) ; 2. reticent, reluctant.

Synonyms
1. taciturn, quiet, uncommunicative.

Antonyms
1. talkative, voluble.

These are shitty and indulgent definitions. When I learned it, reticent meant shy or reserved, a character trait, not a transient (changing like weather) disposition to do something. I can assure doubters that reluctant used to be a common word, used correctly, at last as late as the 1970s. Back then, men were men, they wore vertically striped pants and had sideburns, and they didn’t appear in public with unusual words like ‘reticent’ on their lips. Today, reticent is common; it experienced a mini-vogue, the origins of which I don’t know, but probably trace to some tv dolt trying to appear intelligent by using a slightly uncommon term. Reticent came to replace reluctant in the mouth of a public that doesn’t read, that only watches tv. Since both are roughly shaped the same, with r, c and t, the public figured they must mean the same thing. They do not. Whites should distinguish themselves by making necessary distinctions, discernments and discriminations.

…

3. Multiplying syllables, terms, etc., decreasing effects

Here we have the modern tendency to multiply nouns, a tendency characteristic of middle-class self-importance, as the late

Paul Fussell Paul Fussell

would say, and also of bureaucratese. There is nothing in situtation not encompassed by murder. And you will agree that murder is about as strong as words get. “What we have here is a murder, plain and simple.” That communicates as effectively as possible the point dead’s dad seeks to make. Throwing in situation brings nothing but a stray thought about a character in Jersey Shore.

‘murder situation’ – death of Brittany Murphy
http://jezebel.com/brittany-murphys-…urd-1467629337

4. Sociopath and psychopath are bullshit terms

In this world dollars flow to those who can guess the future. Be closer to getting it right than others. The average person, thinking it is thinking, simply applies these cool terms after the fact, and believes it is performing analysis. It is not. If these terms actually meant something, psychopaths and sociopaths could be identified before the fact, their actions predicted. But they can’t. It is a mistake simply to go around calling anyone one dislikes, or whose actions one disagrees with, a psychopath or a sociopath. That is precisely the same thing that is done when our political and racial enemies call us haters. Same thing goes for monster. If one teenage girl bullies another, and the victim commits suicide, that does not confer monsterhood or psychopathy or sociopathy on the harasser. If you read the story comments thru the link below, you’ll see the lefties reading the face of the girl teen and seeing evil, etc in it, just like subpar WN confidently identifying jews from photos. A side point, evoked by the discussion of the 14-year-old nigger that murdered its math teacher up in Massachusetts, is that when you call something a monster, you’re taking away, by removing focus from, its responsibility for its deed. Don’t let people escape responsibility, even verbally. That’s important. Don’t use words that move the focus off the person’s decision to commit any particular act – good or bad. That is the practical definition of liberalism. Divide people into two camps: the good and the bad. The good are inherently good, and responsible for nothing, and the bad are irredeemably evil, and responsible for everything – not just their own actions, but the actions of the good people! Thus white-male ‘racism’ is responsible for johnny nigger’s rape-torture-murder. Liberals really do think like this. And there are a thousand subtler variation of this use of words to evade or cover up or displace responsibility.

The use of the terms psychopath or sociopath means nothing except that the user tries to cloak his emotional reaction in pseudo-clinical, pseudo-professional garb to make it appear cool scientific judgment. Own your hate, plebes! It is nothing to be ashamed of, provided the object merits it, as it does in this case.

http://gawker.com/14-year-old-indict…-ma-1469195202

The Altered ‘White’: From Bad to Good in Breaking Bad

By Alex Linder

[ The following is from a forum thread posting. ]

Going to add my thoughts on Breaking Bad, as they occur. This show, along with Mad Men, Sopranos and The Wire, is commonly cited by the controlled media as one of the best shows ever made, and all four prove we’re living in a Golden Age of television.

Why talk about these shows? They’ve been seen by millions, thus offering a common reference point as we talk with others. Same reason VNN used to run brief, witty movie reviews by Mark Rivers, before he burned out after about 150.

I have read a middling amount of analysis of Breaking Bad. Pretty much the usual – everyone tries to spin it his own way, whether right-wing christian, like Coulter above, or more commonly to the left. I’ll try my own view, which is not so much WN as related to being a white MAN, and what that’s about. Loyalty, one’s family, competence, all those good things. BB’s not simply about morality, let alone a morality play. Simpleton reads, such as Coulter offers above, pander to the middle-class christian nibblerabbits, but I’ll analyze it from an adult point of view.

The show is the brainchild of Vince Gilligan, who is a Southerner, from Richmond, Virginia. Of course, his path to film leads through New York. He showed talent along the way, and eventually was connected to the guy who created X-Files, Chris Carter. He wrote a good many X-Files episodes himself. Gilligan is an Aryan. He calls himself agnostic. No apparent religious background, or at least nothing uncommon, from what I could find in a brief search. He says his girlfriend’s belief has become his own mantra: “I’d like to believe there’s a heaven, but I can’t NOT believe there’s a hell.” So, he’s basically a legacy christian product, with a sort of half-assed belief in karma. Pretty similar to most people these days, actually.

Ok, as Greece calls, I’ll nail my thesis. Less of a thesis than the question that interests me most. I didn’t watch this show along the way. The jews get no cable money from me. But after hearing people talk about the show for years, and finding the premise interesting, I discovered the entire series online and watched it over a couple weeks.

Creator Gilligan expressly states that what interests him is the character changing from good guy to bad guy, from protagonist to antagonist, which he says characters almost never do in conventional tv. General discussions run along these lines, following the main character Walter White’s supposed moral decline from modest, honest, competent, docile high-school chemistry teacher into empire-building meth chef. What interests me is the extent to which White’s badness, his supposed moral evil, is simply his evolution through his own decisions and will into a real man – a powerful, loyal, competent, decisive agent.

This is not a political show by any means. There is far less to tease out re our White Nationalist cause than one would find in most tv or cable shows, or movies – at least so far as the racial part. But as I’ve said many times, our cause is not just about the white in white man, but about the man in white man. This show very directly concerns manliness, and in these concerns bears directly on our cause. As I’ve also said before, too many White Nationalists haven’t given any thought to what a white man actually is. They regard it as self evident, but it isn’t. I’ll grind my own axes along the way, as Coulter does above. Most of White’s evil is simply a man dealing rationally and effectively with the problems that arise in an illegal business where the high stakes involve dangerous competition.

Walter White – start with the name. Can’t spell Walter without alter. Altering is what the show is about. White starts out white, but ends up Black. That’s the conventional read. I don’t see it that way. Rather, changed circumstances brought out what had always been there, but never before had been called upon. White’s real but latent nature was simply triggered into action by his finding out he’s going to die soon due to lung cancer. He becomes what he has always been – on the verge of being no more. That’s all. White changes from passive to decisive. In the world we live in in 2013, virtually any decisiveness or masculinity not channeled into war for Israel, or defending innocent female victims against some other evil man, ‘deadbeat dad’ or ‘wifebeater,’ is looked on as bad and dangerous in itself. Masculinity is frowned on by the powers that be. Masculine activity and energy is turned into ADD among youth, then it becomes abuse, verbal or physical, when the man is a young adult, and ends in court, with his kids taken away, and ‘deadbeat dad’ status stamped on his forehead the minute he can’t fork over the outrageous sums the court demands he pays the always innocent always victimized always abused woman.

Deep life truth, you might learn at your own cost, as many have: no one believes, truly believes, women are capable of taking responsibility for anything. That’s why they are never really held accountable for anything, informally or formally. Feminists and traditional women are alike on this point. Don’t be fooled by words! Reality is ganz anders.

A few features of Breaking Bad deserve special mention.

– unlike in Dexter or Sopranos, the title sequence and recaps are extremely brief. This is to someone’s great credit. All future showmakers should follow the 30-second rule.

– second great achievement of Gilligan is his refusal to use music excessively the way most do, as a cheap mood shifter or transition or montage showing development. Music is used sparingly, there is no need for its cheap drama when the show has the real thing. Again, other showmakers should take note. Music is used by most moviemakers and tvmakers as the filmic equivalent of high-fructose corn syrup.

– third – similar to second, the wonderful lack of dream sequences. Another cheap, awful device that Gilligan avoids entirely, just wonderful. All should copy him. As Goethe says, the master shows himself by his limitations. Gilligant avoids cheap resorts. He has real art, hence doesn’t need them.

– fourth – it has been said this film shows the consequences of actions. That is true. But it is easy and wrong to view this as “getting what he/they deserved” or any other cheap moralism. Far more, this series is neutral on that stuff, and that means its consequences are simply what actually tends to happen when you get into this sort of business. I never once get the sense Gilligan is making moral points, he’s telling a story. You can infer lessons, but they’re not necessarily the ones the chrissy obviousists insist on. Yeah, no shit, when you get involved in high stakes poker, there will be days you lose a lot of money. When you get involved in high-stakes drug operations, you can lose not only money but your life. No shit. Who doesn’t know that? There’s no moral lesson there, there’s simple fact. And of course, the christian never considers the other side. Walter enjoys the free play of his talents and personality, and builds up a hell of stake for his progeny. A simple christian “that’s immoral!” doesn’t make those facts go away. In short, meth has an upside. The christian is too much of a simpleton to see it, and if he could, he’d be too cowardly to acknowledge it. Christians are despicable; their cult, devolutionary.

– fifth – This series shows that real men act, they don’t blather. Most of the non-women in this movie are spare with words. Never stand when you can sit, never sit when you can lie. By same token, never speak when you can use a look, raise an eyebrow. Deeds, not words. No excuses, no tears. Those belong to the world of women and she-males, such as christian technical males are supposed to become, to be ‘good.’

Good scene: I particularly liked the talking pillow episode. In this bit, White’s extended family are discussing what he should do in light of his diagnosis with lung cancer. Should he get chemo, or not, or what? The wife who called this discussion, and has the idea of the talking pillow (the one with the pillow talks, the others listen), has the fixed idea that he must undergo chemo. Chemo is painful and debilitating and fails more often than it succeeds. There are reasons one might choose not to go that route. The wife wants Walter to get chemo, and the talking session is supposed to reinforce that view, under false banner of free and honest discussion. But when her sister gets the pillow, her sister being a radiation tech, she says what I say above, and says that Walter’s decision to avoid chemo is perfectly rational. At which point the wife, Skyler, goes nuts. Up to that point she’s been getting everyone else to stick to the rules, to shut up when they don’t have the pillow, and listen to the speaker. But the minute her sister starts saying something she disagrees with, why, the rules fly right out the window and she gets very angry. I thought this was the single best scene in the show, a real demonstration of the weak-mindedness and hypocrisy of the average woman. It was truly funny, too.

But in the end, Walter defers to his wife and gets the chemo. This brings out another interesting aspect to the show, the question of the natural relation between men and women. The show ran five seasons. Through about three of them, Walter spends the time he’s not cooking meth trying to hide what he’s doing from his wife. She figures something is up, but won’t trust him to do what is right, she keeps picking at it and trying to get him to reveal things. He endlessly placates her but she is never satisfied. All the discussions about this show have White as the bad guy, and they dislike his wife for being a nagger. To me, the larger issue is the relation between man and wife, or husband and wife as they always say these days in televised wedding ceremonies, real or fictional. Were things truly not better when women just shut up and trusted men? Communication is overrated. Most of it is just internal problems that don’t do anything but weigh others down. Most communication is for one’s own emotional benefit, not for the benefit of the other person.

This show is about men and their loyalties. Women just aren’t really relevant to anything. They are repeaters, seedbeds. No one needs the garden to have opinions, just grow the food. Women are along for the ride, sexually and psychologically. They suffer, they enjoy – best said, best summed, things happen to them. Things usually meaning men. Very seldom do they initiate, beyond manipulations they think they can get away with. They simply aren’t interesting, from a dramatic standpoint.

Now let’s get to the heart of it. White is evil. He suffers the consequences of his evil choices. This is the way the christian retard wants to look at White – and at everything. The funny thing about Christian morality is that it’s completely selective. It never applies to the christian’s own actions. We back Israel, Israel provides guns and weapons to subsets of Muslims to overthrow democratic governments, or at least stable ones, in the name of democracy. These muslims chop people’s heads off, eat their internal organs. Has the christian done evil? Hell, no! It’s very formulaic with these adult children. There are never any consequences to supporting Israel, which is always the right thing to do. If you’re on the side of Good, you can do whatever evil you want. Then the next minute the conservative justifying pro-Israel cannibalism turns around and browbeats liberals for their moral relativism! No one serious takes christianity seriously except as a source of fodder or laughter or danger. Christendom is kind of like a fish tank full of swimming idiots, except the rest of us real humans have to live among them.

Here’s a non-juvenile hence non-christian analysis.

First, to judge White, you have to decide whether making and selling meth is immoral per se. Most say yes. I say no. Given what meth does to the body, it’s the user who is immoral or moral, if you believe that destroying your physical being is immoral. To me, that’s not an interesting question. Use meth, you’ll destroy yourself physically, as far as I know, but that’s your business.

White makes the purest and finest meth anyone has seen. That’s manly, that competence. He takes pride in the purity of his product. So already the christian crybabies doubly hate and fear him! He’s not only doing something immoral, he’s doing it well. Oh, he’s going to hell for sure. Again, juvenile is the only way to regard christians when it comes to their judgments.

White ‘n’ crew’s actions are far more usefully analyzed economically, as a study in black markets rather than black hearts. When a product or service is illegal, business disputes can’t be settled in court. They have to be fought out, outside the law. This has many implications. If there’s serious competition for marketshare, then the businessmen must needs become experts in self-defense as well as their actual product. Or at least know where to hire the talent. All this White learns along the way – and as he survives until the end, outlasting many more experienced and seemingly tougher men, he can be said truly to win. He proved his great competence at every step along the way. Real men are competent. Masters of their domain, as Seinfeld expressed it. White is the master of his domain. He not only produces the best meth the world has ever seen, or at the the world around Albuquerque, he is able to grow and protect his budding empire, even under the most difficult and hair-raising conditions. Time after time his newfound toughness, his brains and his cunning see him out on top. That’s impressive. He’s a man in full. The meth brought it out of him. All these talents he always possessed but never used, trapped in a boring job with a boring woman.

The christian lunatic, slurping away at his thumb, sees White’s death in the final episode as proof he was wrong all along, and so he is now suffering for his sins. But we must judge White by his stated goal. Knowing he was going to die fairly soon from cancer, his goal was to make enough to see his family through the years he wouldn’t be there to provide. He undeniably achieves this. Ten million dollars will go to his family, and through channels they will be forced to accept without question. White succeeded. He made the most of his situation. He achieved what he set out to achieve. What could be manlier than that?

Basically what it comes down to is this: the universe has no ultimate point. At least not one it discloses to anyone. The christ lunatics disagree, as do 1000 other absurd cults, but they’re ridiculous and wrong. There is no point except the ideal you choose to live by. Christianity is an ugly ideal, one of the most repugnant ideas ever come up with – the idea that men should be weak, sheeplike, passive and gelded, and that anything else is immoral and evil. Crissies will deny that description, but it fits their cult perfectly. Even in the rare cases they muster the courage to defend their own kind, they end up doing something insane. One thinks of Codreanu’s cadres carrying out an action against the jews, then turning themselves in to the authorities to be tortured and murdered. Absolutely insane. Christians think winning is a sin. Theirs is essentialy a cult for losers, and losers like company. Together, these pygmies can drag down many a real man.

They say White is an evil man. I say White is a man. And it’s men they think are evil.

That, in a nutshell, is my read. And that is the relevance the themes of Breaking Bad have to our cause: it’s about what it is to be a man, a white man.

Too many WN, even, want to deny manliness in our cause, because they conceive of white men as ants to be farmed by a white government. They want to make government the sole source of all the various arrangements men need to make in their own lives, whether through the economy or anywhere else. Our cause is collective racial defense, not dictating to white MEN how they live their lives. That road leads to the same infantilization we see now, where a man taking control of his life and his business is seen by most people as ‘evil.’ If white men aren’t capable of running their own lives, then our cause has no meaning. Our point is not that white men are so incompetent and helpless they need a dictator to make their most basic decisions, it’s that only in a white context can they flourish. And providing a white context is not something individual white men can create by themselves, it requires collective effort.

It doesn’t even interest me, the argument around the morality of meth. I think meth, on the whole, is good for Whites, because it’s eugenic. Meth use weeds out the serious users in pretty short order. They don’t reproduce. They just die. White produced higher quality meth than any of his competitors could, and for that he earned and deserves respect. He’s a good businessman. He provides the best quality product for his customers. That they choose to use it is their business. They must take responsibility for that. He has kept up his end of the bargain. I truly don’t accept any other way of looking at it.

The people who plague society are not the meth users and producers but the cops. The cops can’t sell anyone their services, they have to force them on them at gunpoint. The real failure of this show is portraying the DEA and its people as the good guys.

But now we get into petty politics. A lot of the leftists want to spin this show that this poower little teacher had to turn to meth to pay his hospital bills because, you know, teachers are SO underfunded. This is the opposite of the truth. Federal and state jobs pay much better benefits than most private companies can afford to, due to taxes. The government is greedy. Not business. Government. The media are always on the side of the state, always blaming business for problems caused by government. Even as the US has been in a recession, the size of government keeps growing. We now have a society in which people don’t dream of starting their own businesses, and serving their fellow citizens, they dream of getting a government job with good benefits. This is socialism. This is the socialist mindset. It sucks. It’s completely and utterly wrong and infantilizing and unAmerican. Worst of all, it’s anti-White.

Walter White didn’t pule and whine and whimper and cry and pray about having cancer, he altered his thinking and behavior to get the money he needed. For his strength and power and knowledge and cunning he is rewarded by the ‘good’ little weak people by being called evil. And at the end, when he admits he enjoyed his wild meth ride, why, he is “selfish.” He didn’t do it for his family, he did it for himself! Yet his family benefits just the same. How about that? Good intentions aren’t enough. White, like a man, produced results. That’s one reason the seedless grapes called christians hate and fear him and his example. I wouldn’t call on a christian to identify an oak tree, let alone good and evil. Would you?

Christianity is in eternal war with manliness, which is why I summed it up in an epigram: you can be a man or a christian – not both.

There’s nothing wrong with being a man – except to a christian. They will tolerate men as women, men as sheep, but never men as men. That would be immoral. That will lead to hell.

This is the silly cult that took over our race? Tall about something one can feel legitimate shame and guilt over!

Let us end this saddest of sicko cults before it ends us. What do you say, white man?

Now let’s look at Coulter’s thoughts.

Quote:

‘Breaking Bad’: A Christian Parable

By Ann Coulter on October 2, 2013 at 8:08pm

For readers interested in an Obamacare column this week, please refer to the 40,000 columns I’ve written on the subject from 2008 to last week. This one’s about AMC’s smash TV series “Breaking Bad”—the most Christian Hollywood production since Mel Gibson’s “The Passion of the Christ.” (Not surprisingly, both were big hits!)

Breaking Bad has nothing christian about it, either intentionally or by implication. Things happen that tendentious scrawny scolds can moralize about, but that’s on them, that’s not from Gilligan. All he believes or hopes is that people who do bad things should be punished for it, or what does the universe mean? That’s a common if silly view. But White doesn’t suffer anything for what he does beyond what is logically predictable, or statistically likely. Any belief there’s some greater meaning or ultimate punishment must be supplied externally, from the head of the watcher, because it’s not in the show.

Quote:

It may seem counterintuitive that a TV show about a meth cook could have a conservative theme, much less a Christian one, but that’s because people think Christian movies are supposed to have camels—or a “Little House on the Prairie” cast. READ THE BIBLE! It’s chockablock with gore, incest, jealousy, murder, love and hate. Because the Bible tells the truth, the lessons are eternal—which also marks the difference between great literature and passing amusements. Recall that even Jesus usually made his points with stories. The sweet, soulful druggie on “Breaking Bad,” Jesse Pinkman, illustrates—heartbreakingly—the monumental importance of the cross. Believing he is responsible for his girlfriend Jane’s death by overdose, Jesse goes to some godless hippie rehab center. Naturally, he is still unable to forgive himself. Perfectly rationally, he concludes: “I learned it in rehab. It’s all about accepting who you really are. I accept who I am. … I’m the bad guy.” He returns to cooking meth. Mayhem, murder and disaster ensue. There’s only one thing in the world that ever could have allowed Jesse to forgive himself: The understanding that God sent his only son to die for Jesse’s sins, no matter how abominable. To not forgive himself after that would be an insult to God, dismissing what Jesus did on the cross as not such a big deal.

Right-wingers like Coulter object to criminals blaming society for their crimes, but then they turn around and claim that the fictional god named jesus can absolve people of their responsibility for ‘sins’ all parties agree they committed! Which is it, Apple Annie? How can someone else take responsibility for your sins? He can’t. Someone else can no more absolve your sins than lift weights and run laps for you. You can’t have it both ways, chrissy paralogicians, though you never stop trying. Shut your mouths, cap your pens, quit embarrassing yourselves.

Jesse disliked therapy precisely because accepted responsibility for his actions, and felt remorse for what he had done – and he hated what the instructor was trying to teach, that you must accept yourself, destructive actions and all. Should everything just be accepted? Jesse says no. He finally gets the group leader to admit that he doesn’t tolerate Jesse’s original reason for attending the sessions – to sell meth to the recovering addicts. So there is somewhere to draw the line. Even the all-accepting therapist has something he won’t accept or tolerate.

That’s largely the message of the show – being a man is about what you will and won’t tolerate. The bible has one set of answers, but there are infinite numbers of others. Jesse never forgave himself for things that he did. There is no indication of that, at least. Coulter is simply forcing him into her ideological mold. He returns to cooking meth. Mayhem, murder and disaster ensue. Not because cooking meth is inherently evil, but because it’s illegal. This is the weakness of seeing everything as a morality play, it blinds you to simple, factual reality. Jesse never forgave himself for getting his girlfriend back on the drugs she had gotten away from, and why should he? Of course, she is guilty too, more than he is, in fact, but as I said above, no one really believes women are capable of independent action, so Jesse manfully if inaccurately assumes responsibility for her death. Why should he forgive himself? He doesn’t have to obsess about it, but neither should he forgive himself. Life is heavier than christian helium. Reality has no “get out of jail free card,” only christianity, selling false hope to true dopes.

You know, I spent my entire youth growing up reading conservatives. Reading their warnings against moral relativism. But moral relativism is real. Human societies always have a bad and a good, but they undeniably vary somewhat by time and place. Within different contexts morality is real enough, useful enough, necessary enough, just to give society some driving lanes, but to call it absolute? No. There is no indication anywhere morality is absolute. Not by any ordinary evidential standard.

Here’s the only moral absolute, and no philosopher ever has or will come up with anything to gainsay it.

Not a single man alive had any say in his own creation. Having never consented even to his own existence, he is under absolutely no obligation to any man or any set of rules.

THAT is absolute. No one ever can or will produce a morality as firmly grounded as that one.

You owe no one anything. That’s the starting point. Such obligations and commitments and loyalties as you choose to take on SUBSEQUENTLY are your business. But you didn’t sign any papers or agreements before you were born, so no one can reasonably hold you to anything. Morality is simply a human construction, made to make people feel comfortable with what’s going on. In absolute terms it is absolutely meaningless, and you can take that to the bank.

Here’s the question that confounds the christian puerile like Coulter, whining about moral relativism. If the lack of absolute morality means that everything is permitted, then how can you deny that Jesus dying for your sins results in the exact same thing? If everything I do can be forgiven, then why shouldn’t I do exactly what I damn well please?

Coulter says it herself: it doesn’t matter what you did (or DO), Jesus died for your sins. You are forgiven. How is that conservative religious view not the same thing in different words as the liberal view?

God does not exist – everything is permitted. – liberal relativism

Jesus forgives all sins – everything is permitted. – conservative relativism

Believe either one, you end up the same damn place!

Here’s the reality: morality is not weaker for being relative, nor is it made stronger by advancing false claims that it is absolute.

If Jesus forgives all sins, then everything is permitted. That’s the inescapable conclusion to be drawn from Coulter’s view, which is liberalism by another name. A man’s actions bear no real weight, since all men are sinners, as the christian claims, and all sins are forgiven, as the christian also claims. That’s the christian world – it’s for babies, namby-pampies and cowards. In a man’s world, like the world Walter White and Jesse Pinkman inhabit, the world of the illegal meth business, a man’s words and actions are deadly serious things, with consequences that cannot be avoided. There are no takebacks, no do-overs, no didn’t-mean-its, no get-out-of-jail-frees. No Mulligans in Gilligan’s island. In christian’s world, nothing has any weight, ultimately, for all the high and mighty claims about absolutes and higher morality. That’s the essential irony and silliness and puerility of the cult’s doctrines.

Quote:

The meth cook’s wife, Skyler, illustrates why Scripture instructs us to flee evil and admonishes: “You shall have no other gods before me.” When Skyler discovers her husband is a meth cook, she stays with him, despite hating him for what he’s done. Eventually she becomes his partner in crime. It worked out badly for her. The only explanation for Skyler’s decision to stay is that she still loves Walt and—as she tells her divorce lawyer—she is desperate to prevent her son from finding out his father is a meth cook. Her husband and son have become her “gods,” whom she values more than the one true God.

One can only laugh at this. No matter what Skyler did, it’s child’s play to find a christian verse justifying it. I thought “the greatest of these is love.” And women are supposed to be obedient to their husbands. And we’re supposed to be our brother’s keeper” – but not our husband’s?

You see how silly this is. Bandying bible verses is a mug’s game.

Not to mention, Coulter is factually wrong. Or lying. I don’t know which. But Skyler did leave her husband. Did begin the process to file for divorce. Did move the kids out of the house. It was Walter who cleverly forced his way back into his own place, surviving her cop call to throw him out. Only much later did she come back around. Just as she did in her book about communism, Coulter promotes or suppresses whatever she needs to advance her thesis, reality be damned. In her book on communism, Coulter completely exculpated jews of their 100% responsibility for the creation of the doctrine and its spread through much of the world. This is typical of christians, this sort of basic, essential, characteristic, fundamental dishonesty. It is observable in most, I assert, most christian intellectuals. Yet they are always the first ones with morality on their lips. I’m dead serious, as one who has spent his professional life criticizing and analyzing the jews trying to genocide our white race: how do you write a book about communism and not point out the jews are the driving power (Churchill) behind it? Does that not bespeak a certain fundamental character defect – a basic, underlying, deep and thoroughgoing dishonesty? Forgive me for not taking seriously this woman’s appeals to morality.

[thanks to a storm for knocking out my internet and breaking my chain of thought. fuck you, nature!]

Quote:

In such cases, Jesus does not mince words: “And a person’s enemies will be those of his own household. Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me, and whoever loves a son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.”

Sounds like something a cult leader would say, you ask me. Separate a child from her parents, then brainwash her.

Quote:

But the most incessantly proved lesson of “Breaking Bad” is about the greatest sin of all: pride. Other than Dante’s Lucifer or Shakespeare’s Iago—and, of course, the Bible’s Judas—there is no better study of the sin of pride than “Breaking Bad’s” Walter White.

Pride is a sin? Pride is what allowed the White man to rise. Pride is the father of standards. Baseless pride can be destructive, but legitimate pride is a good and necessary thing. Pride as a sin – yeah, if I was an incompetent loser, I meant find that doctrine highly tempting.

Pride is what led Walter White to perfect meth cooking so that his purity was higher than anyone had seen. That’s a bad thing? The hell it is. That’s a good thing. Pride was what prevented White from doing the same mediocre job the average cook would be content with. Pride is good, far more than it’s bad.

Notice, again, my theme, how any human quality that gets close to manliness – pride, strength, toughness, cunning, endurance – becomes a sin to the christian. Uh oh. The guy’s not acting like a gerbil, a sheep, or a prey animal any longer. Danger! Danger! He’s acting like he’s a man – and he’s happy about it, rather than ashamed! Then out in a jumbling pour come the epithets: sin! evil! immoral! bad! prideful!

Christianity is basically just a bunch of losers celebrating their weakness, and using their association to denounce and, if they can, bring down the strong. I’m not the first to say that, I’m simply confirming it from my own experience.

Quote:

A high school chemistry teacher, Walt starts out as a sympathetic character—even if you don’t totally buy that a basically good guy would turn to cooking methamphetamine to provide for his family before he dies of lung cancer. But throughout five seasons, we watch him become irredeemably evil because of his pride.

Oh, I thought you just finished saying above there was no such thing as irredeemable evil – you know, since your Jebus character died to absolve ALL our sins. I mean, right? Do words have meaning, Ann? Or are they just there to look pretty?

Even using ‘evil’ in the conventional sense, what’s so evil about what White did? He killed people? Were any of them innocent? Hell, no. They were dishonest businessmen attempting to smash his operations, or screw him in some other way. At least one of them was simply crazy. White played by the rules of the illegal-business game, and proved better than men in it long before he ever thought about getting involved. ‘Evil’ is mostly just a term used by inferior people, cowards and incomps, to explain the curious success, or attractiveness (Wilde), of others. Who did White kill who didn’t deserve it? He stood by as Jesse’s girlfriend choked to death on her own overdose vomit. Is that immoral? The christian says you’re your brother’s keeper, but there’s no reason to accept that. That’s mere opinion. Jane brought her death on herself by choosing to use a drug which frequently produces the particular circumstances that killed her. That’s her fault. To a secondary and lesser extent, it’s Jesse’s fault for reintroducing her to drugs after she was on the path to sobriety. White needed his partner’s full attention, so he simply let nature take its course. You can call that immoral, but the universe knows no such thing. You’re just a human flinging adjectives. There’s absolutely zero indication that morality exists in any independent sense. How about the crazy meth gangster Tuco? Is White crazy for killing him? Hell, White’s crazy NOT to kill him. Even though he actually didn’t.

Quote:

Contrarily, Walt’s DEA agent brother-in-law, Hank Schrader, is something of a buffoon at the beginning of the series. But because of his godly choices—the polar opposite of Walt’s—he ends up becoming not only an extremely likable person, but a deeply good and heroic one. Even his stupid jokes get funny. He is the manly one.

Really? The guy works for the DEA. Taking bread by taxes out of honest men’s mouths so he can have a comfortable, easy job that 99/100ths involves nothing more than, as the series shows, spying on innocent people playing cards in their RV. While this bloat-gutted tool makes a huge salary, enjoys huge, unearned benefits, real people have to work real jobs to get by. Apple Annie’s just another little dog trying to lick the mouth of the big dog, which is anyone who works for the federal government. Anything authoritarian has her full respect, she rolls right over on her back. Our Heroes – no, they aren’t. Real men don’t join the army. Real men don’t join the cops. Real men sure as hell don’t join the DEA. As I’ve said before, all cops are K-9 units. And the two-footed ones are no more worthy of respect than the four-footed.

And yet again, this real man, this DEA hero, this guy who’s portrayed as female-sharp at reading faces, thoughts, emotions and body cues, this guy can’t figure out for years that his own brother-in-law is dealing meth. This is an actual problem with the series. The guy can’t be super sharp everywhere else, and then dumb as fuck when it comes to his own family. Really…it never occurs to you to ask your brother-in-law chemistry expert some leading questions, to find out what he knows about meth production, just to see how he responds. Ask him about the chemistry involved, perfectly innocent. I find this curious cluelessness the least plausible part and biggest defect of the show. It’s not a huge flaw, but it’s not a small flaw either. A guy as sharp as Hank is portrayed would have put the picture together sooner.

Quote:

It’s Hank whom Walt’s underage son calls after being arrested for trying to buy beer. Hank’s the one who warns the son about drug use by taking him to meet Wendy the meth-addict whore. Hank is the voice of gentle rectitude when Walt monstrously gets his son so drunk he throws up into the pool.

Walter White does all that – and sets his son up with $10m. Game, Walt.

Quote:

Along with some normal human imperfections, Hank embodies all the Christian virtues—patience, diligence, humility, kindness. Indeed, Hank is the only character who always seems to be helping everyone else with their problems—shoplifting, marital separation, cancer, “fugue” states—rather than burdening them with his own.

Really? Walter burdens others with his problems? He does everything he possibly can to separate his money raising from his wife and child. All he needs is some alone time, but she can’t be content with that. I mean, I felt, watching it, he was incredibly, tiresomely over-placating of her. I honestly wonder about this. This seems to be the default. The man is just guilty. No matter what it is, he’s responsible. Her feelings, attitudes, actions – he’s responsible. All she is responsible for is deciding whether she’s happy or not. The rest is up to the man. This truly is how their relationship is portrayed over the first couple seasons. Indeed, this is par for the course in all tv presentations of marriages these days. There’s no room left for the man to be a man because everything is about the woman. She and her insipid, meaningless, ever-changing feelings become the basis of all social life, and soak up all the air and psychic energy in the room. Who needs that? It’s refreshing to see in BB men dealing with men, in the arid, light-aired expanse of the American West, and if I haven’t said it thirty-two times, let me say it a thirty-third: the West IS America. The northeast aint America. The South aint America. The midwest aint America. The West…is America. No amount of socialist legislation can change the American ambiance that only the West possesses. One of the great things about this show is just seeing the geography, the landscapes, the flatness, the aridity, the mountains in the distance. Such a psychologically healthy environment. Spare, cool, refreshing, beautiful in a subtle way…free…spacious…masculine. In the east, south and midwest, the cunts are all smashed together and have to be nice. In the West, there’s room for balls and elbows and integrity.

Hank is what’s considered a good man, generally. I don’t disagree with that. But Walt is too – and through the entire series. His badness is reserved for his enemies. Toward his family he is always helpful and fair. He is about a man’s business, and his problems in the family direction mostly come from their interfering, even if only by prodding, into what he is doing. It’s not like his wife is any great shakes. She cheats on him, kicks him out for no real reason, is overly intrusive in her questioning. Yet he’s the bad guy. I don’t see it. If you don’t think that cooking meth is some great crime in and of itself, regardless of what the laws say, and I don’t, then it’s hard to see Walt as doing anything particularly evil or immoral. It was the others who were fucking things up for him and Jesse. He did his job. He cooked high-quality meth. He made the best arrangements he could for its profitable distribution. And he dealt like a man with such serious problems as arose. He also shielded his family, successfully, from this rough business. In the end, he died on his own terms, having accomplished his mission. What’s not to respect? Very little.

No, no, we’re to be little blue groupies like Ann. The DEA guy is the good guy. Why, Ann? You ever hear of a little thing called freedom? I know the very concept is super scary to you conservatives, but, believe it or not, it used to be considered the defining feature of Americanism. The very idea of a DEA is unAmerican, let alone slobbing its knob like you do. We’re obviously not going to get any freedom with the supersized government we have now. Maybe the good guys are the ones who just take it. Rather than the “good guys” who just take their salaries from us at gunpoint so they can play their little games of cops and robbers. But this conclusion requires thinking and going against the mob, and these are not among Manny’s qualities. She’s just another authoritarian.

Quote:

(In accordance with Hollywood’s modern Hays Code prohibiting any realistic depiction of Christianity,

Have to laugh at “realistic” and what we know she means by it, but notice the way her all-too-conservative, all-too-christian cowardice prevents her from mentioning that it is jews responsible for this code since, as she knows, they dominate Hollywood. Ann is a coward. Just like her male conservative peers. For all I know, cowardice is considered a virtue by christians, since, after all, it takes pride to stand up for yourself, and for the truth. One would never expect the average christian to take a principled stand on anything.

Quote:

there is none in “Breaking Bad”—which is even weirder than the fact that everyone on the show is still using flip phones. In real life, Hank, Skyler and Jesse would have been throwing themselves on their knees, praying to Jesus—in which case the series would have ended with my favorite five minutes of television ever, other than the first Romney-Obama debate: Hank arresting Walt.)

Ann Coulter is a real AmeriKwan – she has the soul of an anonymous phone snitch.

Quote:

What’s so fabulous about Walt’s descent into darkness is that the audience is tricked into joining Walt’s temporizing—at least through his first few steps.

Descent into darkness, a cheap and stupid cliche. He got into an illegal business, and had to deal with the problems that cropped in the only way such operations can – through violence, blackmail, intimidation, etc. He didn’t descend into darkness, he ascended into masculinity. Unless, of course, the two things are the same – which one suspects Coulter and the rest of the christian sheep really do believe in their heart.

Quote:

One of the earliest and most subtly cruel of Walt’s bad acts (subtle only in the sense that no one dies) is his allowing a high school janitor to be humiliated and arrested in front of the entire school, accused of stealing the lab equipment that Walt himself had purloined to make meth. We’ve met the janitor before. He was kind to Walt, cleaning up after finding him throwing up in a school bathroom from the chemo, and offering him chewing gum.

Yeah, the noble mexican wronged by the evil white man. We haven’t seen that 1000x before. Except…the janitor was a druggie. So, you know, be consistent, if you’re denouncing illegal drug use, Annie. But she’s just using whatever stick comes to hand to beat her theme. It’s not Walter’s job to prosecute crime; if the cops suck at it, that’s their fault, if they’re busting innocent people.

Quote:

But we went along with the sacrifice of this good man, barely giving it another thought.

Wait a minute. He was a pothead. How can using illegal drugs not destroy your status as a “good man,” Ms conservative? Be consistent. It could be framed this way: Walt’s criminal theft inadvertently helped the school, and society, by removing a pothead from a position from which he might be able to influence young minds.

Quote:

Yes, it was a tough break for him, but at least our hero Walt was off the hook! The important thing was, Walt was safe from the inquiries of his bloodhound brother-in-law. Whew! Worst of all, when Walt watches Jesse’s girlfriend, Jane, choke to death on her own vomit—inadvertently caused by Walt’s jostling Jesse, flipping Jane onto her back—we rejoice. We don’t even wince, as we did with the blameless janitor. Jane was trouble: She had blackmailed Walt and threatened to blackmail him again. She also had turned Jesse onto heroin. Good. She’s dead.

Again: where’s the immorality? It’s your belief, not some graven principle, that we are our brother’s keeper. I thought you conservatives were about personal responsibility. White didn’t turn Jane on her back, force her to OD, cause her to puke. He just watched nature play itself out. He didn’t act the way you think he should have acted, but who died and made your opinion about how people ought to act into some kind of holy law? What’s evil, I can just as easily argue, by your own express principles, is your not holding Jane and Jane alone responsible for taking the drugs that led to the overdose that led to the vomiting and the inability to clear airwaves resulting in death. Jane alone. But your interest in personal responsibility comes and goes as your argument needs, one observes.

Quote:

In this way, the viewers are tricked into being co-conspirators with Walt. But, luckily, we are only observers. We can escape Walt’s choices. He can’t.

Where’s the evidence he ever wanted to escape his choices? Or was unhappy with how they worked out – apart from Hank’s death, which he tried as hard as he could to prevent? It’s incumbent on you to prove this. You’re the one claiming it’s a christian parable. If so, show me the repentant Walter White lamenting his choices at the end, wishing he had done differently. I saw a guy who achieved his stated mission and died with a smile on his face. Did you actually watch these episodes, Apple Annie, or you just breaking wind?

Quote:

Soon, we begin to realize that Walt’s first malevolent acts—the ones we went along with!—made it easier for him to rationalize the next one and the next, until there’s no limit to what he won’t do, including violently attacking his wife, kidnapping his infant daughter, ordering the murder of his virtual-son, Jesse, and, perhaps most sinisterly, coldly informing Jesse that he had stood and watched as Jane choked to death.

Good example of what a liberal Coulter actually is. He “kidnaps” his own daughter? Really? Does the daughter only belong to the mother? And what’s this “we went along with”? Who’s this we, Annie? You and the silverfish that lives in your twat? I didn’t go along with anything, I watched a fictional story about a man entering an illegal business. And I was highly entertained, watching him work his way through the obstacles. How I feel about the morality of what he did isn’t particularly interesting to me, since it’s mere accident of law that meth is illegal. I think it, and all other drugs, should be completely legal.

Also notice this subtle point: christians always play it like eating with your mouth open inevitably leads to mass murder. Everything is a gateway to some eekable horror. It’s just childishness. Coulter isn’t dumb, but hers is the same reasoning that the mouthbreather christians use when they forbid their tots from playing Dungeons & Dragons because it will turn them to witchcraft.

White never rationalized a damn thing. He simply couldn’t bring himself to admit how much he enjoyed what he was doing, for all its terrors, until the very end. The meth business used him to full capacity, and he liked that. As any creature would, like a mother pig sucked on by fifteen piglets, all teats occupied. The only evidence about how he felt is that he took evident and justified professional pride in the quality of his product. And he was doing it for his family. He piled up 80m dollars, even if he lost all but 10m by the end. It’s an up and down business. He came out 10m ahead, dealing with some rough customers. And he passed it all on to his family. On his own terms, and by objective measures, he succeeded. Not only succeeded in some specific mission, but he triumphed in a spiritual sense – he overcame great difficulties by exhibiting courage, cunning and brains. That’s heroic. The moral sense is mostly just a pretty name for christian cowardice, and no amount its girlish yippings can diminish what White accomplished. He won. That’s why he had a smile on his face. That’s also an indication of Gilligan’s real attitude, no matter what he says in public. Maybe karma isn’t real. Let alone heaven and hell. Maybe that’s the secret hidden meaning of ‘Breaking Bad.’ By his actions, by his success, Walter White, the altered white, changed himself from a white mouse into a white man – breaking the bad, which was the erstwhile weak Walter. His real altering was from weak to strong – from bad to good. Not good to bad. Unless, like christian cowards, to be redundant, you consider it better to be weak than strong. Better to be a white sheep or white mouse than a White Man. I’m not a christian; I don’t.

Quote:

He hadn’t made any of these increasingly depraved moral choices for “his family”—as he finally admits in the last episode. It was for himself, to feed his pride.

He can say what he likes. The final fact is that his family is secure for lifetimes. That is no small thing. He provided more for them that they would ever need. He achieved his mission. His confessing to enjoying it doesn’t change any of that. It just gives christian milksops an easy way to browbeat. Why shouldn’t he take pride in the excellence of his product? Why shouldn’t he take pride in his ability to overcome fear, and in outwitting his powerful enemies? Any man would take pride in those.

Pride is a sin? Oh yeah? Says who?

Pride goeth before a fall, says the christian, but verily I say unto you, with greater accuracy, pride goeth before a rise.

Christianity is despicable for many reasons, but not least because simply saying the right things and passivity qualify you as good. It’s a contemptible outward-show religion for people without talent, courage, beauty or anything the world conventionally prizes. Christianity is basically the ugly girl whose advocates pump her “great personailty.” Naw, even there you suck too, jesus ninnies.

As if a meth dealer could cause 1/1000th the community damage any given christian preacher does! The meth dealer plucks human weeds for profit, leaving a better, healthier human garden; the christian, by direct contrast, farms these defectives, these weeds, for profit. If anyone deserves the title “good” it’s the former. The meth dealer is effectively a eugenicist, the christian a dysgenicist.

Quote:

Walt followed his “personal ethics”—which Pope Francis has reportedly said is good enough for God.

Yeah, because pretending your ethics aren’t personal but come from on high makes it so. Mere assertion, Ann, mere assertion. Doesn’t make it so, no matter how many sad clowns you can pack in a pew. You ever hear the statement “the public is always wrong”? Apply that to your cult, and you won’t find it wanting.

Not to mention, Apple Annie – show me the christian who exhibits 1% of the personal loyalty Walter White exhibits towards everyone in his extended family and his business partner. Christians don’t act like that. They run their mouths. When the heat comes down, they just run. You mock the pope because you’re not catholic, but how are the lesser christians any better? Can you think at all, Annie? Walter White believed his own bullshit and acted on it. By your own admission, the pope can’t even do that! That ought to be a hint to you that there’s no there there in christianity. But you keep right on pretending your personal ethics reflect something absolute, while the next guy’s are velleities blowing in the wind. Whatever makes you feel good, right? Keep pulling your punches when you write about communism or the Hays Code. I guess that’s prudence, and a virtue, rather than cowardly self-interest, a sin. It sure doesn’t break the commandment against lying does it – I mean of course it does, but you lie passively rather than actively, so I’m sure it’s ok and your eternal soul is safe, you quackstress of an analyst. Keep forgetting to mention the jews behind communism and liberalism and everything else you spend your time denouncing. Keep telling yourself you’re on the side of truth and justice and integrity and courage, and all the other good things. It’s what your low kind does.

Quote:

“Breaking Bad” demonstrates what the Proverbs teach: There is a way that appears to be right, but in the end it leads to death.

Unlike the right way, which leads to…well, it leads to death too, but uh, just ignore that fact, and concentrate on this incredible (imaginary) afterlife you get when you die! I know there’s no real “evidence” of such, but hey, you can’t prove it’s not true! And isn’t that really good enough? For a christian, yes. For a man, no.

Great show, great credit to creator Gilligan, and great credit to to the actors who were, with only one exception, exceptional. Watch it and after you watch, think deeply about what it means to be a man, and a white man. It’s very far from self-evident. Bring your assumptions to the surface, which this show will help you do, and see if you can figure out a solid answer.

On Democracy

By Alex Linder

[ The following is from a forum thread posting. ]

democracy is a weasel word, as used by the powers that be. in one day we have seen the democratic will of the majority (defense of marriage act, simply tossed out by a US judge). and now we see a private company complying with a political authority’s request to shut down a particular account because it was transmitting political opinions that are “illegal” in a democracy because they threaten the basis of that democracy. well, that’s certainly an interesting paradox now, isn’t it?: free expression of opinion isn’t the basis of democracy but a threat to it! and should the wrong opinion make it all the way into law, when then we can simply have a king, a know-better, toss the law out on its ear and encode what the public should have voted as the law of the land. thus we see that democracy is not the rule of the people but rule in the name of the people…by a tiny minority of people that is at odds with the people. so democracy is rule by an elite, but not just an elite, an elite hostile to the majority of the people. thus the term ‘democracy’ is a verbal camouflage. it conceals the nature of the operation from those not paying attention. and this is why the powers that be can go on and on about democracy and the will of the people while always siding with the alien over the native, the sex deviant over the normal, and the censor over the free-speaker.

On racism and nigger as terms

By Alex Linder

The power in nigger is that the truth it contains is undeniable. Niggers exist. And they’re worthless. And we all know it. And that term shows it.

The christ cultists can go on and on about every Apocrine-American possessing an “eternal soul” of “inestimable worth,” and that lie sells among the pious and timid, but there will always remain a minority with the audacity to accept the information its feelers are transmitting. And those feelers, those tentacles, those particle-collectors scream as one: niggers exist – but they shouldn’t. Nigger cuts through the bullshit, the endless feed and stream issuing unceasingly from every lying church and school and media outlet on the planet, and that is why nigger will never, ever go away. If nigger didn’t apply, its application wouldn’t hurt, and the powers that be would laugh at it rather than ban it. The fact that niggers exist is also longstanding proof that the powers of the baptismal fount and the sociological wizards are considerably less than advertised. The nigger represents a professional failure on the part of the christ and sociology cults, and the alchemists grow red-faced when you bring it up. Your use of nigger is like chiding an Original Alchemist for his inability to turn lead into gold.

The only word with even more power than nigger is racist. The taboos around racism and nigger are of course from the same cloth. Racism only works because people let it. It’s a one-word verbal trick equivalent to the question “have you stopped beating your wife yet?” It can’t be answered with one word, it requires an explanation. But the minute you explain, you’re on the defensive, which means you’ve lost, because you’ve acknowledged the need to defend yourself. You wouldn’t need defense if you weren’t guilty. So the charge of racism has no meaning other than its function, which is a direct assault on your moral probity. So you can either respond by implicitly acknowledging the character attack with a fuck-you, or you can counter attack, per the Mantra, for example, by calling the perpetrator of the verbal attack something equally heavy: an anti-White. But losers — Southerners, conservatives, idiots, religious cretins — prefer to take the defensive. Nazis win. I’m-not,-sees always lose. And they’re too dumb even to figure out why.

Always attack. Only attack. Never defend.

Politics 101.

[ The above is from a forum thread posting. ]