Last night I was taking my break behind Bubba’s register when Al, the bread vender, stopped by and began ranting and raving about the recent attacks on whites, about all of the taxes he pays going to breed violent welfare punks that will someday rob him. He totally cannot figure me out, living in the dark city, grossing less than half of what he pays in taxes.
Al makes a lot of sense until you find out he has a double standard. He began cheering the fact that three white guys from a Pennsylvania town near his home recently beat a Mexican to death. Al considers himself a moderate ‘Libertarian-leaning conservative,’ yet he believes in mob rule via violent purging, so long as it is white guys doing the purging.
The collective wisdom in our society is that only white guys like Al can be hateful to the point of acting on their racist beliefs, and that black youths are merely misguided mirrors of the white man’s perennial hate. However, this time last week I spoke to a black man who is an elementary school principal, who suggested that bricking white ladies in the head and demolishing some guy’s retail store is justified so long as some white guy told a black protester to get a job.
Bubba looked at me when Al left, and shook his head, demonstrating that he had not been swayed by Al’s argument that all black people are violent fiends.
I have explained to Bubba that these older racist guys are society’s poison, the world’s half-assed nod to tribalism that stops right at ‘us versus them’ and never adopts any of the primal tribal values that are so much bigger, deeper, and more useful than Al’s pedestrian hate. The true sin of such hatred, in my eyes, is that it often leads to clouded tactical judgment and inaccurate strategic assessments.
When you see the world as Al does, as good shining white and bad midnight black, you deprive yourself of an appreciation of the nuanced nature of the threat you face, which limits your action menu to the clumsiest methods. Al is hiding in a small rural town, which is how most white racists deal with their hate, by running away from the object of that crippling emotion. This sissy end of a man's fighting heart, is the reason why primitive warrior societies cultivated cults of honor, based on respect for an enemy.
The warrior who merely hates his enemy becomes as if a woman, whose job it was to hate in primitive societies. When captives were brought home for torture they were typically given to the women as they were renowned for their cruelties. Women are cruel to rivals for the very same reason sissies revel in hatred of an enemy, because they get carried away on the wings of emotion and forget that a man is foremost a tactical creature, and that emotions like hate make of him a woman, hiding in his fairytale cottage, like Al, on the Pennsylvania state line.
And finally, hatred thwarts a man’s ability to make useful alliances with those best positioned to help him achieve his goals, those who have one foot in his world and one foot in the enemy’s world.
“One acts decisively only in the conviction that all the angels are on one side and all the devils on the other.” -Saul Alinsky Rules for Radicals 1971, Tactics — P.134
“Hatred is an element of struggle; relentless hatred of the enemy, that impels us over and beyond the natural limitations of man and transforms us into effective, violent, selective and cold killing machines. Our soldiers must be thus: a people without hatred cannot vanquish a brutal enemy.”
-Ernesto “Che” Guevara
“Generals think war should be waged like the tourneys of the Middle Ages. I have no use for knights; I need revolutionaries.” -Adolf Hitler
“Winston Churchill’s remarks to his private secretary a few hours before the Nazis invaded the Soviet Union graphically pointed out the politics of means and ends in war. Informed of the imminent turn of events, the secretary inquired how Churchill, the leading British anti-communist, could reconcile himself to being on the same side as the Soviets. Would Churchill find it embarrassing and difficult to ask his government to support the communists? Churchill’s reply was clear and unequivocal: “Not at all. I have only one purpose, the destruction of Hitler, and my life is much simplified thereby. If Hitler invaded Hell I would at least make a favorable reference to the Devil in the House of Commons.” - Saul Alinsky Rules for Radicals 1971, Tactics — P.29.
“I pursued my enemies and crushed them; I did not turn back till they were destroyed. I crushed them completely, and they could not rise; they fell beneath my feet. You armed me with strength for battle; you humbled my adversaries before me. You made my enemies turn their backs in flight, and I destroyed my foes. They cried for help, but there was no one to save them—to the Lord, but he did not answer. I beat them as fine as the dust of the earth; I pounded and trampled them like mud in the streets.” -2 Samuel 22:38-43 (NIV)
As usual, the bible says it best. Nothing like Old Testament war quotes.
[Quirt and Randy are getting ready to leave the First day meeting. Randy is reading aloud from the Bible given to Quirt by the Quakers]
Randy McCall: Listen to this: "And Benaiah, the son of Jehoiada, the son of a valiant man of Kabzeel, who had done many acts of valor, slew two men of Moab and went down and slew three lions in the midst of a pit in the time of snow."
Randy McCall: [to Quirt] Whew, three lions!
Randy McCall: [continues reading] "And Benaiah slew an Egyptian who had a sword. He took away his sword and slew him with a staff... " I guess that must mean a club. Oh, brother, this is good writing!
Quirt Evans: Let's go!
Randy McCall: What about the Bible? You can't throw it away, that would be bad luck.
Quirt Evans: Then keep it!
Randy McCall: Alright. This is one book I'm sure gonna read.
"Angel and the Badman", starring John Wane as Quirt Evans, 1947. FYI: the Bible verse cited is from 2 Samuel 23.
And that is my favorite bible passage—Benaiah the badass.
Thanks
Yes James, the Holy Bible is full of good military quotes, as well as good military advice. Everything from strategies for deploying armies down to individual common task skills. For example, the effective use of challenge and pass word (071-331-0801, U.S. Army Warrior Task Skill Level I) is described in Judges 12:4-6. The Judges were actually warlords, military commanders appointed to lead the tribes of Isrаel. As military commanders they had judicial power to reward and punish everyone, warrior and non-combatant, placed under their authority, hence the title “judge” as translated from the Hebrew. The Twelve Tribes of Isrаel were a people under arms (every able-bodied man was a warrior) surrounded by enemies back then (not dissimilar to the modern nation of Isrаel). Contrary to popular belief today, Judaism and Christianity are NOT pacifist religions. Modern pacifism entails the doctrine that one should not employ force or violence even in self-defense. Judaism and Christianity are merely “non-violent”, eschewing aggressive violence as a just and acceptable means of getting what you want from others. When Jesus suggested to his disciples that they “turn the other cheek” he was stating that they did not need to accept a challenge to fight (symbolized by the slap on the cheek); just as Stoic philosophers, like Epictetus, suggested that any insult, injury or embarrassment one might suffer from such an act resided mainly in one’s own mind. Does the “turn the other cheek” admonition then mean that you must suffer major evil without resisting, like letting someone chop off your hand or the hands of your wife and children? I think we all know the answer to that. Judaism and Christianity follow the doctrine of “universal benevolence” (AKA the Golden Rule), that is to treat other humans, even those not a member of our own tribe, in the kind and benevolent manner most of us wish to be treated ourselves. The “Golden Rule” even predates the life and ministry of Jesus and was promoted by many others, including Buddha, Confucius, Plato and the Stoics. Much erroneous pacifist dogma (Judaic, Christian and secular humanist) comes from the fact that the original meaning of the Sixth Commandment has been often mistranslated. In the original Hebrew the Sixth Commandant states “Lo Tirtzach”: meaning “No murder” or do not murder. For some reason the 40 some scholars that King James commissioned to compile the English language translation of the Holy Bible that bears his name (i.e. The King James Version or KJV) translated the Sixth Commandment as “Thou shalt not kill”. There is big difference between the two translations, the former making a clear distinction between justified and unjustified homicide. This misinterpretation alone caused no end of confusion and disagreement over the centuries. The New International Version (NIV) of the Holy Bible, a modern English translation, on the other hand correctly translates the Sixth Commandment as “You shall not murder”. Rabbi Dovid Bendory of JPFO provides a good discussion on the correct interpretation of the Commandment and how false pacifist dogmas should not prevent one from engaging in righteous and effective self-defense: jpfo.org/rabbi/6th-commandment.htmhttp://jpfo.org/rabbi/6th-commandment.htm. Just as the Commandment tells us not to murder others, we should also not engage in “self-murder”, AKA “suicide”. In particular we should not adopt suicidal social and political doctrines or imagine that Judeo-Christian religion or the U.S Constitution are suicide pacts for our own people and our own Western culture: pjmedia.com/victordavishanson/multicultural-suicide.
The Leftists are very skillful at using rhetoric to confuse issues and to silence their opposition. They tell you not to “hate”, when they themselves are filled with hatred for anything and everything normal, traditional and/or successful. The Lefties will kick you in the balls and poke you in the eye and then tell you with a straight face how very bad it is to kick people in the balls and poke them in the eye. Our President is especially accomplished at this type of Leftist rhetorical duplicity and intellectual dishonesty: nationalreview.com/article/398283/snarker-chief-victor-davis-hanson. Who would have imagined that race relations in America would actually become worse, AFTER the majority of white Americans elected a black man as their President? Twice even! Now we are all to believe that the reason for all the crime and poverty in the black community is because white people suck? Don’t buy that if you want to live white folks!