tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5335225799942938922.post4285844877429892745..comments2023-11-05T02:45:26.790-05:00Comments on ScotchFiend: Prophets of Doom and the Need for OrganizationScotchFiendhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05305353862849309788noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5335225799942938922.post-60666259002472480872009-07-08T19:19:45.787-04:002009-07-08T19:19:45.787-04:00Dr.D,
Let me clarify a few points because you see...Dr.D,<br /><br />Let me clarify a few points because you seem to think I naively believe we are moving towards a greater free exchange of ideas. I did state: <i>"I believe we need much more free speech and open investigation while our "civil society" and elites are pushing for the opposite."</i>. So I actually agree with you that our ruling elites and the left are trying to create a totalitarian, cultural Marxist society that will likely be a hybrid of 1984 and Brave New World with the elites in firm control and real dissent forbidden.<br /><br />Because they are so strongly entrenched throughout our "civil society", it will take great effort and time to create alternative structures to wake up more of our people, including some that staff the ruling institutions. So my proposal to create software, web sites and truth-seeking organizations is one small front on the battle against their hegemony. Yes, we're fighting against a strong current, but if we just give up, they'll almost certainly win.<br /><br />Our position is stronger than it appears because the official ideologies are filled with contradictions and double standards that we can aggressively exploit. The new DVD <a href="http://www.aconversationaboutrace.com/" rel="nofollow">A Conversation About Race</a> is an excellent example of how the reigning anti-White ideology can be shredded by intelligent, fair-minded scrutiny, which is nearly always suppressed by the MSM and Hollywood in favor of continual bombardment by anti-White messages.<br /><br />The Left has tried to stifle free speech (e.g. shouting down the Tancredo speech at UNC Chapel Hill) and they are trying to destroy the first amendment through explicitly anti-White hate crimes laws and cyberbullying laws that will be expansively reinterpreted to punish dissent. We can use the outrageous behavior of the cultural Marxists to persaude most people they are actually hate-filled, anti-White Stalinists who stand on an alien foundation of evil instead of supposed morality. We must aggressively rebut their claims of morality and justice.<br /><br />When I referred to being open to the left, my point was that traditional institutions like the MSM, Hollywood, academia, government and think tanks are not trustworthy, so to find the truth we need new mechanisms. An example is 9-11. I now doubt the full truth of the official storyline. This issue demands much closer scrutiny than has been offered by our elites, since it allowed them to dramatically enhance their power and control while not doing a damn thing to secure our borders or restrict Muslim immigration.<br /><br />Some critiques from the left may have merit. For example, criticisms of the American Empire or MSM by Chomsky or of corporate power by Nader. Even though the cultural Marxists are our bitter enemies, we must still deal with their points honestly and comprehensively if only to find the flaws in their arguments and assertions to win back some of our brainwashed masses and cognitive elites. I'm NOT stating the honest, scholarly treatment is our only response. Far from it.<br /><br />I'm NOT advocating any sort of unilateral disarmament on our part where we behave like gentleman while our enemies are ruthless thugs fighting dirty. We need a wide diversity of different people taking varying approaches, including some that may not appeal to our personal style or values.<br /><br />But at its core our movement should be founded on truth and intellectual honesty, hence my concern with finding the truth and working with others of good faith who may not share all our beliefs or values. White advocates need to build bridges to others to explain our perspective and its justice and to weaken the current unfair and simple-minded demonization of White advocates or White nationalists. On many issues of importance to White advocates we can cooperate with others to weaken the power of the elites, e.g. restricting immigration, reining in the looting of the middle and working classes by elites, foreigners and corporations, preserving and expanding freedom of speech, stopping American aggression around the world, etc.ScotchFiendhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05305353862849309788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5335225799942938922.post-61538450647014345432009-07-07T22:26:30.748-04:002009-07-07T22:26:30.748-04:00You have said,
We should fully reject the popula...You have said, <br /><br />We should fully reject the popular tactic of demonizing speakers, usually using ad hominem attacks, to avoid confronting their arguments. The neocons are notorious for this extreme intellectual dishonesty. Everyone's arguments should be considered in good faith and any flaws pointed out using facts and logic or by highlighting differences in values.<br /><br />This is certainly true, but this is happening less and less, not more. The common tactic of the Left is shout down speakers and to hound them away, not allowing them to be heard. This has happened repeatedly within the past year. I think it is entirely unrealistic to think that we are going to be moving toward a more free exchange of ideas as our society becomes more totalitarian.Dr.Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18360786634583725263noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5335225799942938922.post-40549053145667113422009-06-25T11:27:55.564-04:002009-06-25T11:27:55.564-04:00Latte Island,
Yup, that killing 80% prediction se...Latte Island,<br /><br />Yup, that killing 80% prediction seems to be the most extreme of his predictions. Again, I'm no expert on his theories and I don't wish to spend hundreds or thousands of hours to become one. But, it would be a valuable public service if some intelligent laymen did make an effort to closely analyze his theories using truth exploration systems as discussed in my post. That way if he is a deceptive huckster or a deluded maniac, the rest of us can know that without having to make a similar effort.<br /><br />I believe the doomsters as follows: Peter Schiff > Gerald Celente > Alex Jones, where ">" means "is more believable than". Even if some portion of what Alex Jones alleges are slanderous lies against our elites, part of it may still be true. I'd like a way to separate the wheat from the chaff and for falsehoods to be exposed.<br /><br />Specifically regarding the genocide allegation, there clearly is a growing movement of environmentalist radicals that essentially hate human life, believing it damages the larger, mystical ecosystem. The citizen/scientist/electronics expert <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forrest_Mims" rel="nofollow">Forrest Mims</a> alleged that an eminent scientist, Eric Pianka, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mims-Pianka_controversy" rel="nofollow">called for the death of 90% of humanity</a>, with the <i>enthusiastic support</i> of most of his scientific audience. I personally find Mr. Mims more credible than Dr. Pianka. There are quotes by various notables expressing similar, if less explicit, sympathies. Think Al Gore and his hysterical environmentalism.<br /><br />Another indicator of this are books like <a href="http://www.amazon.com/World-Without-Us-Alan-Weisman/dp/0312427905" rel="nofollow">A World Without Us</a> that take glee in positing the death of humanity and how groovy that would be for Mother Earth.<br /><br />Even if it is very unlikely, it is not beyond the realm of plausibility that some ultra-elite power-brokers, assuming they even exist, would find the current masses of humanity useful for undermining our current societies through heavy immigration, but once they have a totalitarian system in place, would prefer to eliminate the least useful of their slaves because their existence then became a resource-consuming liability better replaced with automation.<br /><br />How many people during or after World War II would've believed Roosevelt quietly encouraged the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor and intentionally crippled the military defenses so that the attack would be devastating? This appears to be the historical consensus now in spite of it being treasonous behavior on Roosevelt's part.<br /><br />So even though some questions appear to be and likely are complete bunk, by having a modest-sized group examine them carefully using the appropriate tools, the rest of us can KNOW they're bunk (or not).ScotchFiendhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05305353862849309788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5335225799942938922.post-10691760565041024272009-06-25T05:26:18.450-04:002009-06-25T05:26:18.450-04:00The idea that the world government would wipe out ...The idea that the world government would wipe out 80% of the population seems obviously false to me, as the people who are in charge seem to be promoting the population explosion. More people=more profits, more servile workers, etc. Why would the elites want to kill off their slaves?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com