There’s propaganda in our society that constantly reinforces the idea that whites favoring their own is dangerous, and too every problem under the Sun (present and historic) is blamed on whites
.
If you think there is only x amount of “good will” to go around, showing good will, or working for the improvement of one’s self or their people, necessarily must take away “good will” from others. If there is only a certain amount of economic success, and one person or group of people, have a large amount of money, or are economically successful, then it follows that they only have that success at the expense of other who are poor or less well off.
This attitude (limited resources, less for those already here) has also insinuated itself within nuclear families. White people who have bought this line of reasoning for their communities have usually bought it for their own immediate families also, and used it as an excuse to reduce the number of offspring.
This attitude (limited resources, less for those already here) has also insinuated itself within nuclear families. White people who have bought this line of reasoning for their communities have usually bought it for their own immediate families also, and used it as an excuse to reduce the number of offspring.
Oh, ouch.
You’re right.
I hear folks say all the time, “We just can’t afford another child.” Or, “We’ll start having kids when we can afford to send them to a private school.”
Now you have me wondering what line of conversation one might use with someone who makes the automatic response expected in order to help them think beyond that self-deception…
Stalking taboos requires “long periods of quietness, a low profile, protective coloration, and the diversion of the quarry’s attention to other matters until the propitious moment.”
...a taboo cannot be productively attacked until the time is ripe.
Avoid irrelevant offensiveness.
The first step in emasculating a taboo should be to pin a proper label on it. As with Rumpelstilskin in the fairy story, the full power of a taboo depends on its remaining unnamed.
Never tackle more than one taboo at a time.
It’s interesting Fleming brings out so many racialists, and yet he claims his approach is:
To the extent that we here at the magazine have the resources to do anything, it is to educate some younger Americans into what they have been deprived of and to expose the logic that makes them victims.
And that does make sense. Teach someone of what was lost, create an attachment, and tear off the blinders, the automatic responses you refer to. Allow them to seek after the attachment you formed.
And the tearing off, if not done by revealing it to be a taboo, then go at it another route if possible to get them to think about what they’re not meant to think about. For isn’t the purpose of stating the taboo to get the receiver to think about what he’s not supposed to? There might then be other ways towards the same goal.
Actually, not consciously, however, I’ve used Socratic Seminars many times in teaching, and the question/answer thing comes naturally to me now, so I don’t even think about it.
I found the reference to Stalking Taboos very interesting, especially as so many racial differences and issues are heavily tabooed from discussion.
Well, from a biblical perspective there is “the fall” to consider in all economic matters. As a consequence, all value must come as a result of “work.” There is no magic wand that produces value from nothing. Now that work is a form of stored energy that must be constantly renewed or it dwindles and order, economic, political, or otherwise, degenerates into chaos or anarchy, depending on the system under discussion. So in this sense, we do indeed live under the reign of “scarcity” because of the cost in time-energy, and other forms of stored value, such as the stored value of cumulative invention, intelligence, shared knowledge, and ingenuity. We are unable to bring all units of stored value to bear simultaneously because of the time-energy constraint. But this is a theoretical limit, not a practical one.
Now forms of stored value are not equally distributed. Parasitism is the gain from social stored energy obtained not through lawful means, but through the wielding of “power,” that is, the power of coercion. Philosophically speaking, because of the effects of the fall, value is always the result of a form of work. Even in nature, its production is work that comes at a cost of energy, and man’s dominion over nature permits him to take and benefit from the work of nature. Civilization is also a “work,” and it is a work that can be plundered and despoiled until all its stored value is exhausted, and this is precisely what is occurring in so-called Third World immigration: the looting of a civilization from a desire for dishonest gain -a desire resulting from the exhaustion and bankruptcy of their own civilizations.
If nature is limited, then scarcity is ultimately its end. If nature is infinite, then scarcity need not apply. But I would say that for practical purposes, there is no scarcity in nature that is not the result of the unwillingness or inability to work in the right ways and apply personal and collective ingenuity. Resource competition does not really come, in my opinion, from the idea of scarcity. No one who plunders really does so because they have philosophical conviction that there is a limit to nature’s abundance, and that therefore they must take “their piece” of the limited pie. The motive for plunder comes from the immaturity, childishness, and “fallenness” of men, in whom resides a sense of entitlement to the produce of others, individually, and to the produce of civilizations collectively because it is “not fair” that some have while they do not have, dismissing as they do the notion that all value is the result of work. They look at abundance and see not work but “ease.” They do not realize that such “ease” was hard won, and exists due to the stored value obtained through millenniums of work and collective ingenuity.
Thus, what the civilization plunderers want, is the produce of another’s work, and to inherit the produce of a civilization not their own, which did not produce the value, nor store it, nor enhance it, nor deploy it to produce even more. Thus it is essentially personal and civilizational robbery.
[ Edited: 05 August 2008 03:49 PM by John Marshall ]
But there is also another tendency that is common among people. When they can, they wish to live and prosper at the expense of others. This is no rash accusation. Nor does it come from a gloomy and uncharitable spirit. The annals of history bear witness to the truth of it: the incessant wars, mass migrations, religious persecutions, universal slavery, dishonesty in commerce, and monopolies. This fatal desire has its origin in the very nature of man — in that primitive, universal, and insuppressible instinct that impels him to satisfy his desires with the least possible pain.
Man can live and satisfy his wants only by ceaseless labor; by the ceaseless application of his faculties to natural resources. This process is the origin of property.
But it is also true that a man may live and satisfy his wants by seizing and consuming the products of the labor of others. This process is the origin of plunder.
Now since man is naturally inclined to avoid pain — and since labor is pain in itself — it follows that men will resort to plunder whenever plunder is easier than work. History shows this quite clearly.
Teach someone of what was lost, create an attachment, and tear off the blinders
However, before that a step could be to remove a previous unwanted attachment.
Also, people will remember stories, so providing an example of someone acting correctly or feeling correctly would have an effect.
Additionally, people like being rewarded, so reward for any correct steps taken, a bad example: the Viet Cong communists who held essay contests and praised desired parts within. Peer pressure is similar and peer pressure supposedly plays a powerful force in smaller societies.
Habit is another powerful force.
I guess having that organised together in a post could be helpful…
Not to say people shouldn’t think for themselves, but the irrational is a powerful force. Were that all faithful and attached to their kin and land, and to a good set of traditions.
I think I had one of these kind folks teaching classes in my teaching credential program…
I’m glad she failed with you. It’s amazing how these ideologies are like religions and can really drive people to become like that… If you’re religious you lead people to the truth, but if you’re atheist there’s no core.
