You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
0

[–] 18483731? ago 

If I had to guess, I would say Mason's flirtation with LeVay's stuff had more to do with getting a new audience for his ideas, and partly just to further ideologically separate himself from "Right" wing ZOG-lings. Mason had already done the same thing by supporting Charles Manson, after all.

This isn't wrong, but perhaps there are other ways to go about it. I like to call them wedge issues. They are ideological positions taken simply to keep out ZOG-faggots. People who are under the ideological influence of the ZOG simply won't be able to help themselves from arguing certain things, and this is a sure-fire way to spot them to and to keep them at a distance. Abortion, religion, circumcision, Israel, Hezbollah, etc, etc, can all be turned into wedge issues to separate the wheat from the chaff. Charles Manson and Simon LeVay can also serve that purpose, but in my opinion, could also keep away people who are serious. We don't want to lose any wheat when we do this, and it is better to take issues that are fairly simple to ideologically understand (supporting Manson is easier to understand than supporting Satanism, which could keep out dumb types of Christians who could be useful soldiers, even though Christianity in general is ideological poison).

0
0

[–] 18912591? ago 

Wedge issues

Can you please get a better vocabulary?

Think of 3 words you could use instead of a simpleton word like wedge.

Like you can’t communicate ideas unless you make references to physical objects?

Just stick wedges in everything guys. Just divide the enemy. Split them up. Separate them.

0
0

[–] 18484446? ago 

The fact is that they advocate quality vs quantity, like muscle vs fat, and it's a good principle if applied with the necessary moderation, because you can't have just five super-extremist super-trained guys and change the world, they'll get fucked by the millions of ZOGlings

0
0

[–] 18485562? ago 

The fact is that they advocate quality vs quantity

That is one of the ideological weaknesses of both Pierce and Mason; they generally ascribe differences with people to negative personal qualities like cowardice, stupidity, etc, when they should actually view it as evidence of ideological penetration by the Enemy.

When people are consistently wrong on a wide-range of issues dear to the ZOG, it isn't because they're stupid or cowardly. It is because they identify with the ZOG. They are working for it, usually without any pay. They're trying to ideologically disarm would be militants, to bring them back from the brink, to get them to love the ZOG again, to gradually change their ideological outlook to be one that is compatible with the "Right" wing of ZOG.

Not everyone is going to be Earl Turner. There are places for fat losers in the White Nation Liberation War. Not everyone has to be a soldier. You can be a legal, work a job, and give a portion of your income to people who are fighting (there has to be a method for this to work, I have some ideas myself). You can be a legal and do some minor, relatively safe, but still illegal work (housing people on the run from the ZOG, transporting materials to locations, buying materials that would be hard for soldiers to get their hands on due to their status as wanted criminals, etc). You can even produce propaganda material; literature, short stories, shit-posting on comment sections ,etc. In my view, Pierce is more correct than Mason here, but both of them more-or-less unwilling to see ideological differences as treachery and not stupidity and cowardice, which in my opinion, is a mistake.