|
September 9th, 2009 | #21 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,498
|
Re homeschooling, I think the following would get more attention being posted here instead of in the proper Homeschooling section. Hope you don't mind, seeing as Alex L. mentioned the NEA etc.
John Dewey and the NEA John Dewey, considered the father of modern education, was a fan of the early Soviet Union’s eduactional system. In a December 5, 1928 issue of the New Republic, Dewey wrote of “the marvelous development of progressive educational ideas and practices under the fostering care of the Bolshevist government.” Dewey is also quoted as saying, “Children who know how to think for themselves spoil the harmony of the collective society which is coming where everyone is interdependent.” In 1932, Dewey wrote “Individualism Old and New”, where he stated, “We are in for some kind of socialism, call it by whatever name we please, and no matter what it will be called when it is realized.” According to Wikipedia, Dewey opined: …that fixing the problem with culture is one in the same with that of liberating the individual; by abolishing culture driven by private pecuniary gain and reaffirming the importance of community and industrial cooperative control, Dewey argues that the individual will be harmonized with his communities and liberated to achieve true progress. |
September 10th, 2009 | #22 | |
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 138
|
Quote:
(1) Buckley was a sell-out, but that does not mean that everyone who aspires to be somehow like Buckley aspires to be a sell-out too. I do not know the source, so I do not know the context. Yes, Buckley was a shallow, traitorous, repulsive windbag. But he edited a magazine. He had a TV show. He had access to the monied and intellectual elites. It would be nice to have those things to push race realism. Surely Jared Taylor would do a better job than Buckley did promoting conservatism. ANYBODY could have done a better job than Buckley. (2) I will pass over the fact that Taylor is a Southerner, with at least one distinguished Confederate in the family tree, because Taylor's ancestry, aside from the fact that it is entirely white, should not matter here one bit. I suspect that one does not need to go too far back in any of our family trees to find Christians and liberal fools. If that disqualifies him, then it disqualifies all of us. The other three facts follow if Taylor decided, on the principle of one heresy at a time, to focus solely on race and not touch the Jewish question. You might think that is a foolish strategy given how closely the two issues are connected, since as soon as one is asked about the connection between the two one is forced into an unseemly silence, and if one says anything, one has to lie, i.e., not tell the WHOLE truth. Again, I do not claim to KNOW that this is what Jared Taylor is doing. I have been TOLD that. But the people who told me could have been deceived or deceivers. But it is consistent with the facts that you cite. You challenge me to lay out the strategy I think people like Francis, Taylor, and Buchanan may be following. I think I already have. |
|
September 10th, 2009 | #23 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,311
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Let’s go back a bit further, to 1968. Why did Buchanan support Nixon while Dr. Pierce supported Wallace? I think Buchanan had more reason to know how this would all turn out than Pierce did. As a lower-brow Buckley, Buchanan’s purpose was to deliver working class and upwardly mobile Catholics to the GOP, which GOP would promptly destroy the working class and do nothing good for the Catholic church either. More of the same under Reagan. Now if Buchanan’s political counsel has consistently not been in the group interests of the people he’s counseled, what group has he benefited? I consider that damning proof of everything Alex says and more. |
|||
September 10th, 2009 | #24 |
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 344
|
Buchanan doesn't need to know what the jews are using him for, he only needs to follow their guidelines. Those guidelines are laid down by his jew handlers in the kosher conservative movement, which is not to be confused with the neoconservative movement. Kosher conservatism is any conservative movement that's been neutered by jews. Paleos, libertarians, Catholic traditionalists and the religious right are all jew-safe, castrated conservatisms.
The jew handlers relationships with their pet career girls are much like a the relationship between a pimp and his stable of whores. The jew flatters and bribes the silly girls until they've lost their souls. Neoconservatism is the next step for the conservative eunuch once it has resigned itself to total impotence. That's where, having had its balls removed, the eunuch agrees to be lobotomized, becoming a wooden headed jew puppet who uses the word conservative to describe its multiculturalist, globalist, zionist-socialist automatic reflexes. |
September 10th, 2009 | #25 | ||||
Administrator
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Your actions show your character, Greg. Last edited by Alex Linder; September 10th, 2009 at 11:44 AM. |
||||
September 10th, 2009 | #26 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,278
|
A basic question is are these neocon fellow travelers really sell outs or just stupid?
I remember Buchanan telling his usual right -on conservative line, then mentioned blacks in Washington...'when I grew up, the blacks were actually cleaner and better dressed than whites.' I wonder if he was full of b.s., or just trying to get them on his side, like his choosing that VP candidate when he ran. Surely, he knows it's a waste of time to kiss up to them. I think Taylor is well-read, but he seems to refuse to cross a line. Fear or stupidity? Much like Laura Ingrahm, a talk show conservative I listen, and a fiery one. She really gets ANGRY...but again, it's support the war, Israel, and the GOOD blacks. Now is she stupid or just talks the talk so she stays on the air? Same with Savage. Again, he had another rant on the 'red-diaper-doper babies', and he knows they're Jews. 90 percent of his attacks are on Jews, but he won't say the J word. At times I fantasize...and to any feds listening in, this is ONLY a fantasy...that we take people like Ingrahm or Savage or taylor to a nice place in the country, set them down for a long weekend and talk, dialogue, and ask them to cut the crap and say who's side they are on. I fear the answer may be like in the movie THEY LIVE where the collaborator with the aliens admits he knows what they are, but he makes a lot of money supporting them...'and they're going to win, anyway.' |
September 10th, 2009 | #27 | |
Administrator
|
Quote:
The mentality behind your post... It never ceases to amuse me that your type thinks it is looking down on the Buchanans and Ingrahams. Let me ease your mind: Buchanan and Ingraham have far higher IQs than you do, and a multiple of seven figures more than you do in the bank. They're fully aware that you go against the jews on race or Israel and you run a real risk of being thrown off and under the gravy train. |
|
September 10th, 2009 | #28 |
Administrator
|
I don't want anyone to miss the larger point of this thread:
- the utter inability of WN to maintain a consistent political line. Personal considerations always trump necessary politics. WN who are temperamentally conservative would rather be nice than fight. They will reap the same result conservatives always reap, no matter how much they wink and backslap each other and tell themselves they're being smooth and cagy. |
September 10th, 2009 | #29 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Earth
Posts: 3,699
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ronald Reagan 1964 Un-Scripted words, and he said everything but jooo. He was called a Nut. Public Housing ?
__________________
Isn't it strange that we talk least about the things we think about most? We cannot allow the natural passions and prejudices of other peoples to lead our country to destruction. -Charles A. Lindbergh http://www.fff.org/freedom/0495c.asp Last edited by America First; September 10th, 2009 at 04:53 PM. |
September 10th, 2009 | #30 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,006
|
Article "Jews and American Renaissance" from May 2006. With all 329 comments.
http://web.archive.org/web/200604241...and_americ.php a'. . .To put it more accurately, AR has taken an implicit position on Jews by publishing Jewish authors and inviting Jewish speakers to AR conferences. It should be clear to anyone that Jews have, from the outset, been welcome and equal participants in our efforts. There has always been a minority in the AR constituency that has criticized me and AR for welcoming Jews, and there has been another minority that has criticized me and AR for not denouncing the first minority. These groups have generally treated each other with polite reserve, and expressed their bitterness only among themselves or to me—as was proper. . ." Last edited by Rick Ronsavelle; September 10th, 2009 at 11:29 AM. Reason: addition |
September 10th, 2009 | #31 |
Administrator
|
What about the jews, Jared?
"They look white to me!" Ah...so we can criticize them like other whites? "No. They're whites, but they're a special category, above criticism. If you try to blame them for the policies they caused, my editors will ban you." Thanks for clearing that up, Jerry. |
September 10th, 2009 | #32 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,247
|
Quote:
I don't mean that he was insincere about the cause that he was trying to promote; I mean that he was insincere in the way he argued for it, pretending to revere certain sacred cows that in his heart he probably does not. Donahue has some sick values but he can reason, and he can detect the vulnerabilities in a position. He really made Taylor dance around and look like a shyster, in my opinion. He could not have done that to William Pierce. I saw the same kind of embarrassment when Pat Buchanan had first taken the position that the US should not have gotten involved in World War II. Since Buchanan wasn't willing to take one of these radical positions, that either (a) there was no Holocaust, or (b) the Jews deserved what they allegedly got, he left unchallenged the proposition that some great good had resulted from intervention. The omission made his overall position seem pusillanimous. I don't see any point in attacking somebody like Jared Taylor, or Pat Buchanan, unless they are attacking us, which doesn't seem to be a significant tendency with them. (Even then it would be a bad idea.) I think we are in a position to be more interesting and more compelling than they, and we can attract some of their supporters, many of whom assume that Buchanan and Taylor are hinting at what we actually say. I think you complicate a dynamic that works in our favor if you throw rocks at Buchanan and Taylor, because then the people who have faith in them will wonder what your motives are. Don't throw rocks at these guys. Just point out where they pull their punches, and the more radical-minded of their supporters will notice that what you say is a better representation of reality, and much more interesting as well.
__________________
Anti-Nazi is a codeword for anti-White. www.national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com www.noncounterproductive.blogspot.com www.williamlutherpierce.blogspot.com Last edited by Hadding; September 10th, 2009 at 04:36 PM. |
|
September 10th, 2009 | #33 | |||||
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 138
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
There he goes again. I guess this whole discussion boils down to your ability to divine people's character and motives based on online interactions. Your record speaks for itself. Is this about respect? I got into this discussion because I respect your intellect and talent as a writer. But in terms of your outlook on people, you are a stopped clock, your finger always pointing to cowardice and treachery. I am sure you are right sometimes, but only by accident, not because of good judgment. |
|||||
September 10th, 2009 | #34 | |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 251
|
Quote:
__________________
Occidental Dissent "A functioning police state needs no police." —William Borroughs |
|
September 10th, 2009 | #35 | |
Administrator
|
Quote:
My read on what's possible, and of course I could be wrong, is that white is non-negotiable. It's worth killing over, and our main goal, is an all-white nation. NO JEWS in it. NO MUDS in it. It is worth any amount of fighting, any tactic it takes, to achieve that. Once that is achieved...I have laid out the kind of society I personally want to live in. Understanding that not all white men think alike, I have supported what I think could be a suitable arrangement: small states, microstates, city states, underneath a defensive umbrella. But I repeat, the market and small-stuff I'm talking about is AFTER all the JEWS and MUDS have been dispensed with, and I'm no flusher liberal like Hitler, I believe in extermination for the jews. For the muds, probably other arrangements could be worked out for the unguilty ones. |
|
September 10th, 2009 | #36 | |
Administrator
|
Quote:
No, Greg, what is needed is not teaching, that's the 1%. The 99% is leadership. NO ONE is supplying any leadership. Leadership is not writing books and websites. It is not dinner parties with octogenarians and conservative queers. Leadership is what Rounder did before The Order blew him up. |
|
September 10th, 2009 | #37 | ||
Administrator
|
Quote:
And yes, I always have and will question motives. That is the way of the winner. Accepting motives at face value is the way of the loser. Quote:
Last edited by Alex Linder; September 10th, 2009 at 07:20 PM. |
||
September 10th, 2009 | #38 | |
Administrator
|
Quote:
That's evidence, Greg, whether you accept it or not. Jerry also employs jewish freelance writers such as Nicholas Stix. So, instead of paying white men, he pays jews. That's evidence, Greg, whether you deny it or not. Jerry also has jews speak at his conference, before and after the race-mixers. Is Jerry playing a big joke on the rest of us? I'm starting to think he is. And then of course, we have the nearly perfect historical parallel to the John Birch Society, a proven front for Big Jew. We could add The Turd on Phil Donahue, asked about jews, saying, "They look white to me!" Well, if they're white, then they can be critized at AmRen, right? Doesn't Jerry tell his freepers to blame white people for what jews did? Doesn't he make it clear that critism of jews is streng verboten? Doesn't he ignore that the same jews that can't be criticized are more deeply entrenched in immigration and civil rights bureacracies than they were when they first got the laws Jerry wants changed passed. Just how much evidence do you need before you admit you are willfully refusing to see the truth? Jared "The Polished Turd" Taylor is anti-White. His efforts are aimed to provide a safety valve for jews in case the WN cause ever, as the niggers say, "blows up." |
|
September 10th, 2009 | #39 | ||||
Administrator
|
Quote:
Quote:
Your Edmund Connelly plagiarized my idea that we need a mirror to 'racism.' Quote:
Quote:
|
||||
September 10th, 2009 | #40 |
Administrator
|
The bottom line here, for those looking on, is the blank unwillingness of so-called WN to stick to a line.
Always the conservative has some excuse for the white-blaming jew-excuser, even when he knows better. That's because he likes the guy or because he thinks the guy can do him some personal good. |
Tags |
faileoconservative, whino |
Share |
Thread | |
Display Modes | |
|