Child abusing teacher telling 8 year old children they have “white privilege” This knocks children from their True North Path in Life. We have to help them get it back

h/t to Saboteur

Youtube video below my commentary.

This is soul warfare against children, clipping their wings from childhood.

When I was a child, the worst thing in the world was to be a rich snob. Movies like Caddyshack promoted this meme, showing rich snobs (Elmer Fudds) to be hapless bigots and fools, outsmarted by an updated Bugs Bunny, played by Jackie Mason and then Rodney Dangerfield.

The USA of the 70’s and 80’s in a rural, dying mill town in the north was a mix of hippie ideology, blue collar resentment, and artificial drama, with TV and Movies as the great Moral and Theological Authority. Less cultured people create drama and conflict where none need exist, that often lead to physical confrontation and even murder, just out of boredom. Also, the society of my childhood was very much poisoned by mass media — by the aforementioned movies and TV and pop music. The first time I saw a KISS album, back in the 70’s, I was shocked and disgusted at the sight of the sinister clowns in black leather, and their music revolted me.

Any kind of guilt put on children creates a fake conflict for them, and diverts their life path from its True North. When I was in my 20’s, I realized that there was a more real and more important conflict in the world, and the fake conflicts of the society of my childhood should be discarded. The people who loomed so large over me, who seemed to be the great arbiters of morality, grew up to be very ordinary people who were at best, neutral to me.

The whole white privilege concept is the rich snob updated.

Today’s children have a real conflict in front of them — how are they going to make a living at all? Many are going to figure out that they wasted much of their life on this fake white privilege nonsense, and now they are behind the eight ball. Had they never been diverted from their True North, they could have gotten a much earlier start on real accomplishment.

I believe this is how we frame an attack on white privilege — namely, you got real problems to deal with.

Advertisements

About mindweapon

A mind weapon riding along with Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.https://en.gravatar.com/profiles/edit/#
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

33 Responses to Child abusing teacher telling 8 year old children they have “white privilege” This knocks children from their True North Path in Life. We have to help them get it back

  1. Here in the San Antonio area I run into followers of Christian Zionist a-hole John Hagee. They will bend your ear for hours, dispensing the “secret, insider” knowledge that Hagee imparts to massive numbers of them every Sunday in his mega-church. I nod and smile as the end of the world scenario unfolds and Jews are the choosen ones.

    It seems to me that kids who embrace the indoctrination featured in the video are like Hagee followers. They have a hole in the soul that the indoctrination fills. Telling them that they have real problems to deal with doesn’t get to the hole in the soul.

    I was just posting an article on Henry Makow’s website on my site, where the author brings in Acquinas’ observation that hate is good. Hate is motivated by a threat to the passion you have for the thing you love. If Aquinas is right, and I think he is, the message that loving one’s kin, one’s ancestors, and hating the threat to one’s extended family is good, ought to get us somewhere. I’ve talked about righteous anger and righteous hatred quite a few times before. It’s not hating the threat that is dysfunctional and self-annilating.

    I view righteous hatred as potentially filling the hole in the soul. Am I wrong? Lefties fill it with an imaginary utopia, a vision hard to resist. Where is our utopia? In our history, the lives of our ancestors, etc.

  2. PA says:

    “Where is our utopia?”

    The short answer: 14

    That question gets to the heart of things because it calls out a positive vision that competes with liberalism. So much of White ideological resistance to liberalism has been negative, or reactive. Starting with our thankless support of the Republican Party.

    White man’s soul seeks the exalted, which is why we have always shown valor in combat, as just one example. The Frankfurt School derailed our striving toward the exalted by offering a gold-wrapped turd as an ideal. And our resistance has largely due played into their hands.

    One example: a big thing in my teenage years was the official alarm over pollution of the Chesapeake Bay. Those of us who instinctively distrusted environmentalism as just another tentacle of leftism (which it was), foolishly mocked the ubiquitous “save the bay” slogans with “pave the bay.” What we should have done is to have claimed environmentalism as our own rather than cede it to the libs.

    This in a nutshell is how non-liberals ended up embracing corporatism, warfare state, and ultimately transnational capital as false gods. And when young people that followed saw that the enemy offers a positive vision while the traditional folk defends SUVs, environmental degradation, McDonalds, and “nuke Iran,” they follow the enemy.

    Young white people, in a way the best of our kind, are highly idealistic. This is why they want a positive, affirmative vision. Our job is to expose the leftist “white privilege” false ideal for what it is, and to offer a good ideal.

    • mindweapon says:

      Absolutely, PA. I thiink that we can already compete with the liberals by getting involved in localized food production to fight obesity diabetes.

      That is how we sell local food production — obesity diabetes obesity diabetes obesity diabetes. In other words — Come with me if you want to live.

    • Mr. Rational says:

      What we should have done is to have claimed environmentalism as our own rather than cede it to the libs.

      Environmentalism STARTED as a conservative thing (Theodore Roosevelt, anyone?), but was abandoned when it conflicted with anything-for-the-next-quarterly-profit-statement business interests.

      Environmentalism and conservatism actually fit well with a decent dose of populism.  Had the Republican party not gone into climate-change denial and instead pushed nuclear energy as the way to slash emissions without sacrificing our standard of living, the Marxists would have been stripped of their cover and had to stand naked in the light of public scrutiny, exposed as opponents of anything but grinding poverty for all but the select few (in which they expect to be counted).

      • Jon says:

        “Climate change” is not about saving the earth or reining in corporations. The ruling class is poised to make boatloads of money off it and the little people to have their daily lives micromanaged like never before. What it really is is a cult whose real aim is power and control. If you’ve payed attention at all to history, you should hold that the previous statement should stand as an axiomatic rule regarding anything the dissidents/opponents of which are called “deniers”.

      • mindweapon says:

        Jon,

        Peak oil is likely real though, and that will curb our use of fossil fuels, climate change or no climate change.

        Also, climate change is likely happening whether or not it’s manmade. It’s simply the cycles of the weather. We are in an unusually stable period of climate. If you look at the history of the climate and famines, you’ll see that this is the case.

      • Anon says:

        the biggest use of hydrocarbons is in transportation, nuclear won’t replace that. And the reason for all that transportation is because the marxists want to socially engineer(destroy) white neighborhoods.

        The republicans are mindlessly defending their own, in a clumsy and ineffectual manner, but that is better than the likely alternative. Also with regards to environmentalism, TR promoted Conservationalism, its a bit different. environmentalism is the marxist mindworm that says that people are evil and the root cause of all of the environment’s problems, whereas Conservationalism seeks to protect the environment because of its value and utility to people.

      • Mr. Rational says:

        If you drive an electric vehicle in France or Sweden, your transportation is nuclear-powered in whole or in part and wholly petroleum-free.

      • Mr. Rational says:

        What it really is is a cult whose real aim is power and control. If you’ve payed attention at all to history, you should hold that the previous statement should stand as an axiomatic rule regarding anything the dissidents/opponents of which are called “deniers”.

        Nonsense.  The tobacco companies spent decades denying any link between smoking, cancer and emphysema.  They kept this up against an enormous weight of undeniable laboratory and epidemiological evidence until their legal cover, the supposedly-independent “tobacco institute”, was forced to disgorge its records.

        Climate-change denial is about money.  There is a huge amount of money in digging up coal and drilling oil and gas, and a couple trillion in infrastructure to move it around in the USA alone.  The people who own this stuff want to keep making money from it.

        The solutions to carbon emissions mean their money stream disappears, and a lot less money overall.  At $5 per million BTU, 1 kwh of electricity from your garden-variety gas-fired plant costs about 4.3 cents for fuel.  The uranium fuel rods to make the same amount of electricity cost about 0.7 cents, and that business is already sewn up by others.  The people who make their money from gas and coal will do ANYTHING to keep their gravy train running, even get regional power authorities to buy jet fuel to burn in their turbines when the gas pipelines run out of capacity during cold snaps.  Meanwhile, they try to close nuclear powerplants which have no fuel-delivery issues.  Follow the money.

      • Anon says:

        “If you drive an electric vehicle in France or Sweden, your transportation is nuclear-powered in whole or in part and wholly petroleum-free.” – America is rather more spread out than France and Sweden. You have to solve the 2 hour every day commute problem, and nuclear doesn’t do that.

      • Mr. Rational says:

        You have to solve the 2 hour every day commute problem

        The average daily commute is 16 miles one-way taking 26 minutes, the median is much less (driven up by the long tail on the right).  Commutes of an hour or more comprise only 8%.

        nuclear doesn’t do that.

        Anyone driving a Leaf, C-Max Energi or Fusion Energi can go 16 miles on electric power.  Even the Prius plug-in would be able to do most of that 16 miles on the battery (11 miles rated range).  Nuclear can supply the electricity.

      • Anon says:

        excuse me, just shy of an hour every day total on average. the point remains that this is beyond the capabilities of electrical vehicles presently, and certainly beyond the infrastructure currently available. The next problem there is that new infrastructure won’t be spent on whites, if we’re at that stage we can solve the entire issue immediately.

        I’m not saying nuclear sucks, I’m saying that people will be a lot greener if they don’t have to deal with the consequences of a low trust, low social capital society.

      • Mr. Rational says:

        the point remains that this is beyond the capabilities of electrical vehicles presently

        You must not be paying attention:  there is only one plug-in vehicle on the market today that CAN’T do it.  The plug-in Prius is aimed right at that median (not average) commute, 11 miles one-way.  Fully half of all commuters could zero their workday fuel consumption that way.

        and certainly beyond the infrastructure currently available.

        We’d need something like 75% of all transport electrified before we needed more generators, so long as we charged at night.  If you did 16 miles in the morning at 300 watt-hours per mile, you could plug in with a regular extension cord and be fully charged again by noon.  The daily demand peak is much later, so there should be plenty of headroom to supply electric cars with a top-up at work.

        The next problem there is that new infrastructure won’t be spent on whites

        The grid isn’t segregated.  (But you just gave me an idea for ways to counter things like mob attacks.  Black out the ghetto on the next really hot day, and they’ll get the idea that it’s a bad idea to go flash-mobbing.)

        I’m saying that people will be a lot greener if they don’t have to deal with the consequences of a low trust, low social capital society.

        Keeping people in their cars and off of groid-infested public transit is essential to survival.

      • mindweapon says:

        Keeping people in their cars and off of groid-infested public transit is essential to survival.

        I disagree. I’m an advocate of mass transit and bicycle paths. What we’d have to do is form self defense groups on the mass transit and bike paths. If I lived in an area where knockout king was a thing that was going on, I’d definitely be forming self defense groups.

        People can’t afford cars any more. We need an alternative.

      • Jon says:

        Regarding “white privilege”, here are some questions that should give the lie to the whole concept: Which specific contracts, sovereigns, guardians and/or employers grant the privileges? Doesn’t your problem lie with them and not me (I don’t have the power to grant myself privileges, after all)? Name five things that blacks but not whites are forbidden and the consequences for each if they do them anyway. What is Barack Obama or Oprah Winfrey unable or forbidden to do that white guy living in a trailer park in Arkansas is free to do?

    • Mr. Rational says:

      What we’d have to do is form self defense groups on the mass transit and bike paths.

      That would immediately be spun as KKK mobs out to ethnically cleanse the poor downtrodden from public spaces, and prosecuted accordingly.  Good luck with that.

      • mindweapon says:

        No, it wouldn’t. This is the age of Youtube. Multiple camera angles showing pure defense and no offensive, nobody even shouting racial slurs.

      • Mr. Rational says:

        The vibrant diversities wouldn’t attack your group.  They only attack when they have the advantage of numbers.

      • mindweapon says:

        The process of a 21st century “circling the wagons against the physical threat of diversity” would be very healthy for us.

      • PA says:

        “circling the wagons

        White tourists from various countries did exactly that at the Superdome in 2005. They sat in the circle and walked to the bathroom in groups; even make escorts to female bathrooms.

      • Mr. Rational says:

        But while you’re assembled in your defense groups, the mobs would be free to disperse and attack ones and twos elsewhere.  Worst of all, you would still not be able to use the park or trail for its intended purpose.  Only getting rid of the vibrant diversities will do that, and that requires some measure of aggression.  That in turn would be captured on video and used by the Corrupt Marxist Media to demonize you.

        Fixing this problem requires getting control of the narrative first.  Document the vibrant diversities and their predations and get some eyeballs, THEN you can go to war against them.  Not one second sooner.

        aside: suddenly the text box stays one line high. WTF? I hate it when sites stop working unless third-party Javascript is allowed.

  3. Brandon says:

    Whites can’t get jobs today. Go to any town hall in London (even not heavily black areas) and it’s like walking to the African jungle. Of course, if you want anything done you have to find one of the few White people. This MUST be because the grants from central government are with strings attached – a high % of YKWs work as high level civil servants.

  4. eyeslevel says:

    This event is part of a campaign that in its totality meets the definition of genocide under international law.
    Article 2
    (b) Causing serious bodily or MENTAL harm to members of the group;
    It’s psychological terrorism intended to demoralize and brainwash whites to not be able to defend themselves racially.

  5. eyeslevel says:

    Rosemary Colt and Diana Reeves:

    Let it be known you, the defendants, are hereby officially charged with child abuse, psychological torture, white genocide, domestic terrorism, race treason, anti-white subversion, denigrating white achievement, demoralization of white children, preventing white children from fulfilling their destiny, conspiracy to commit white genocide, making your community unsafe for white children, and justifying and encouraging violent act against white children.

    J’accuse!

    • Erin says:

      Citizen’s arrests are coming. And by citizens I mean citizens of the the White Nation. We don’t have our own geographical location yet but we ARE a nation.

  6. vikingbitch says:

    Reblogged this on vikingbitch's Blog and commented:
    I will never send my kids to public school in the USA. I will not allow their souls to be stolen from them nor will I allow them to be gaslighted into false beliefs.

    Paladin touches upon the idea of hate. I hate America because it is anti White. I hate blacks and jews because they want to genocide the White Race. I hate Gays because they loathe women and women who have children.

    As a White European Aryan American I am hated by everyone so I am returning the favor. My hate gives me the will to survive and then thrive. And I will.
    Chechar notes at The West’s Darkest Hour that Whites must hate in order to survive.

    • wobbly says:

      “Whites must hate in order to survive.”

      And no better reason to hate than the deliberate mass psychological child abuse of white children.

  7. A.Ralston says:

    The term “climate change” is another example of the sly abuse of English for propaganda purposes. It has no precise definition. It means nothing, or it can mean anything that weak minds want it to mean, just like Bush2’s passe phrase “comprehensive immigration reform” or “BHO’s meaningless mantras of “hope” and “change we can believe in.”

    Climate is always changing – always has and always will. Sometimes trends can be discerned, sometimes not, as with all complex natural systems.

  8. UFOHUNTERORGUK says:

    Reblogged this on Ufohunterorguk.com.

  9. fnn says:

    Progressives starting to target the Amish:

    http://www.theburningplatform.com/2014/05/21/death-by-political-correctness/

    …When I gave the same talk a month later at last year’s Age of Limits conference, the reaction was rather different. There was almost no discussion of impediments to implementation or ideas for overcoming them. Instead, the conversation veered off into gender politics, with some amount of booing and hissing from the female members of the audience. You see, the examples I picked, which included, among others, traditional, religious communities with patriarchal gender roles, were said to be ill-suited as models for such a “progressive” group. (By the way, I never proposed that they be used as models, only as examples from which general principles can be uncovered.) Then there followed some harsh (and, to my mind, ridiculous) criticisms of the Amish, who were said to abuse their wives and children. Compared to the focused and productive discussion at Grand Marais, this one turned out to be a complete waste of time. I was flabbergasted by this reaction, only later realizing that I had blundered into an American cultural war zone. I later realized that none of the criticisms raised had the slightest bit of relevance to the topic under discussion.

    • mindweapon says:

      FNN,

      See this paragraph:

      The first one was at the North House Folk School in Grand Marais, Minnesota, on the shore of Lake Superior, an hour’s drive from the Canadian border. There, the talk was very warmly received, by the students and the community elders alike, and resulted in very purposeful discussion. You see, this school is very popular and very successful at teaching a wide range of traditional skills. Many of these skills are directly applicable to creating independent, resilient lifestyles within the setting of a small community. But forming such a community is a problem: real estate is expensive, transportation costs are high, jobs are few and far between and pay less and less, and there is a great deal of financial and regulatory overhead that stands in the way community self-sufficiency. After some brainstorming, a potential solution was hit upon: the school would create a colony for its graduates, allowing successful graduates to become part of it. Since, in turn, the colony would embody the principles taught by the school, it would help strengthen the overall effort.

      Those people are going to make it, the feminists at the Age of Limits conference in PA will not, or will be forced to give up thier political correctness. Political correctness is a luxury of the Petroleum Age.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s