Full Thread: A Modest Hypothetical
View Single Post
Old May 3rd, 2018 #1
Sean Gruber
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,465
Sean Gruber
Default A Modest Hypothetical

Let's say you want to unwelcome a population from a certain area. How to do it? The answer depends on numerical ratio. Let me explain that.

If you're in the minority and the target population is the majority, then you should have a strategy that fits this situation. But, if the situation is different, then you should have a different strategy.

Being in the minority, Team Jew had to play the long game. That meant gaining power gradually. For example, it involved a great deal of money, patiently filched and built up over decades, centuries. In sum, it involved a "sneak up on 'em" strategy. Jews had to roll like that because they were in the minority.

But now ask yourself this. Why should the majority roll the same way?

Yes, the jews' way succeeded, but their situation was different. We should use the right strategy for our situation. We want to use the right tool for the job.

So let's look at our situation, then we will be able to see a smart way to act. The best way to approach anything is to boil it down to one basic thing. The jewish problem is the presence of jews. Removing them solves the problem. That's all. I'm no Stalinist, but "Uncle Joe" made sense when he said, "No man, no problem." That means: there is no problem without the man who is creating the problem.

So, what would a smart majority do to unwelcome a powerful minority? It would let private individuals handle it. It wouldn't need a government program or an organization.

What if jews object to being unwelcomed? Well, consider this. No one organization, party, committee, leader, or wizard would be unwelcoming them. There would be no announcement, no shape to the initiative. They would simply find more and more of their number being unwelcome, by Legion.

I'm thinking of many things individuals could do, such as boycotts. Obviously I don't advocate anything criminal, of course.

I mean, the cat is out of the bag about the jews. The task is to simply spread the news, and unwelcome them.

That is separate from the job of creating a new government from scratch. (But if you would like to vote, or even run for office, do it; I don't see how it can hurt.) The job of forming a White government must be tackled eventually but not as the very first step. Government is an inefficient means of unwelcoming jews. It only seems to offer comprehensiveness and efficiency because we wrongly tend to assume that only a Central Office can solve a Social Problem. One reason for this is that we keep approaching everything like a tiny minority would approach it.

Yes, systemic problems do require systemic—or to use a different word, political—solutions. But here's my claim: although jews cause systemic problems, their presence is not a systemic problem, so unwelcoming them doesn't need a systemic solution. Their unwelcoming could be accumulated over the course of one generation, leaving the way yearly clearer for White politics.

Let's look at it mathematically. Hypothetically speaking, if jews are 2% of US population and Whites are 50%, then 4% of Whites could completely unwelcome them 1:1. Assume more initiative, assume 1:9, and that last percentage drops to .45% ( = 720,000 Whites, if US population is 320 million). Note: NOT forty-five percent—POINT forty-five. That's right: less than half of one percent of US Whites could solve the jewish problem in the US. And spread the solution across a time span of one generation, and who will stop 720,000 individuals, especially if they are not connected by org membership?

No wonder jews urge muds to hate Whites and Whites to hate themselves. Whites have overwhelming advantage, when individuals actuate it.

Even random unwelcoming as outlined here would solve the jewish problem. But an even more effective strategy would be to preference the unwelcoming of those jews who are of greater importance than other jews. Contrary to some people, I don't define "greater importance" to mean only being high up in finance, media, government, or academia. Preferencing such jews for unwelcoming might alert the system that something is happening. Instead, "greater importance" could be about demographics within the jew population. Question: who makes jews? Answer: females. Jewishness is passed through the mother's line. Young jewesses might well be preferenced for unwelcoming by the .45% of Whites who would rather not spend an endless number of decades fighting each dragon's head, each new Barnard Baruch, that sprouts.

Of course nothing in all these hypotheticals should be construed as advocacy of criminal activity such as violence. We should defend our people only the slow, proven, legally accepted way, which is continuing to build democratic White political organizations.
No jews, just right

Less talk, more action