Free PDF

Author : White Bill
Title : General rules for living among other people that many folk haven't seemed to learn
Year : 2003

Link download : White_Bill_-_General_rules_for_living_among_other_people_that_many_folk_haven_t_seemed_to_learn.zip

Commentary— As folk know, I’ve been involved in all sorts of things since I was a teenager, from extremist anarchist groups to hanging around reporting on white nationalists, from coaching and refereeing elementary and junior high school sports to running a small computer consulting business. During these times I’ve learned some things which other people should know, but don’t, and I thought I would try to share them in a simple, condensed form. I must admit that my model for this format are the sales and business advice books published by Jeff Fox— How to Become the CEO and How to Be a Rainmaker. If you’ve never read them, they are among the only books in the genre worth reading (most of the others are a bunch of nonsensical gibberish written by Jews who really don’t know what they are talking about), and I highly recommend them. If not, just read my post below, which will cover some basic statements about the, um, “however many number I come up with” laws of human interaction. 1) Know your potential friends from your enemies. This is the most basic law. It precedes every other law, and is more determinative of your success in dealing with society than any other. Even knowing what you are trying to achieve in life is less important— if you end up among friends, often your goals fall into place; among enemies, you’re goals become unachievable and irrelevant. A potential friend is someone who is honestly trying to achieve a goal. People who are honestly trying to achieve a goal behave reasonably; if given reason to believe a certain behavior will achieve their goals, they will try it. Enemies don’t behave reasonably; they usually conceal their goals from you. Enemies are people who have goals that are contrary to yours; friends are people who will work with you to achieve your goals if they see mutual benefit. Good examples of enemies that white nationalists encounter often are anti-racists— whether communist, liberal or Christian (or all three), members of Jewish groups, members of law enforcement, members of the media, officers of the court, and the like. These people all mean white nationalists harm; if you treat them like your friend, they will use you until they think there is advantage in discarding you. Friends of white nationalists include almost everyone else, and some of the above when they are not acting in an official capacity. Enemies are generally driven to be your enemy by circumstances outside your control; most of your enemies were your enemies long before you ever met them or knew of their existence. The reason you are their enemy is arbitrary; it is the result of their profession or of their erroneous belief, or because of their participation in cultural structures where they have been taught to hate. Because the reason for their opposition is irrational, it cannot be countered by friendly behavior. 2) You have moral obligations towards your friends; you have no moral obligations towards your enemies. This is one of the most basic laws of life that I discovered when I was a young teenager. It is the basis of all true morality. When dealing with people who are innocent, who are neutral, or who are well intentioned, you have a moral obligation in your behavior; when dealing with someone who is actively trying to hurt you and possessed of the power to do so, you have no moral obligations. The Jews actively subvert white nationalist organizations through the use of informers, false arrests, the spreading of lies about the nature and intentions of organizations, the publication of false news, constant propagandizing, criminal acts of harassment, criminal acts of violence, and generally any means at their disposal. They feel no moral obligations towards those they consider to be their enemies. (They also feel no moral obligations towards those they see as their friends, except insofar as is practically necessary, but that is just a manifestation of their immoral nature). Similarly, a judge sitting in judgment against you feels no moral obligation towards you, nor does a reporter writing about you, or a police officer questioning you. Often, these personalities feel an active moral obligation to punish you regardless of guilt; such is the depth to which the mindstate of hate has taken hold. Because your enemies feel no moral obligations towards you, you have no moral obligations towards them. It is morally permissible to lie to, cheat, steal, assault, abuse, insult, defame the character, libel, spread false rumors about, and generally disrupt and harass anyone who is knowingly and maliciously trying to harm you, and who has the power to potentially do so; those who are attempting to hurt you because of their mistaken beliefs (and thus are acting in innocence), or who don’t believe they have real power to harm you (and thus are lacking meaningful malice), are exempt from this statement. Thus an enemy can be fought by any permissible means, but a friend must always be treated respectfully, even if they are in conflict with you. 3) Your moral obligations towards your friends include truth and good faith. It is not permissible to deceive your friends, nor is it permissible to act towards your friends in bad faith. “Friends” here includes everyone from business associates to your wife or girlfriend. When you quote someone a price for a job it should be the best price you can afford to offer; when you offer to sell someone something it should be the best price you can afford. Profittaking is permissible but must always be reasonable given your means and the means of the buyer. Pressuring others into business agreements that are not beneficial to them is not permitted. Actions which exploit others, or which take profit from their vice are not permitted. Acting with the intent of addicting someone to drugs so you can take profit, or loaning someone money with the intent of collecting interest or a share of some theoretical “profits” (without profit to them), or deriving profit from someone else’s sexuality, are all exploitative activities, and thus are not permissible. You have an obligation to tell others the truth about your thoughts, intentions and your feelings. As the Emperor Marcus Aurelius noted, you should never think a thought that you could not immediately express to a friend if he were to inquire “what are you thinking?” You also have an obligation not to engage in violence or coercion against your friends. It is not acceptable to beat your girlfriend or to threaten a friendly person into behaving in some way. You cannot prey on someone’s trust to lure them into being the victim of a crime. You also cannot defraud someone or engage in confidence scams. You also must respect agreements, and carry out your end of them. All of these obligations become null if their fulfillment would endanger the other person. It is permissible to, say, use forcibly move someone who is about to be hit by a truck, even if they don’t see the truck coming and they resist. It is also permissible to lie to someone if, by knowing the truth, you involve them in a conspiracy that could cause them to be imprisoned; it is not permissible in the same situation to lie to them to get them to testify in your defense for that conspiracy. 4) All morality is dictated by power relationships. Strong people are not permitted to hurt weak people, regardless of their intentions towards you. Weak people are permitted to do whatever is necessary to create a parity of strength with the strong. Weakness is relative, and involves the ability to project power. A private individual can say that they were kidnapped by George Bush’s Satanic cult and forced to be a sex slave; they can even publish books about it, regardless of whether or not it is true. If Bill O’Reilly wants to get on FOX News and say that about a private individual, he better have some evidence. A newspaper is permitted to report that the ADL is a criminal organization that is subverting the US Congress; it is also permitted to run the names and addresses of local celebrities who happen to be ADL organizers. A newspaper is not permitted, morally, to report the names and address of a handful of little people passing out National Alliance fliers. It is the belief of the Jews that the more power they have the more permission they have to hurt others that contributes to their moral inferiority to white people. 5) Power carries a social obligation. This is one of the most difficult lessons for people who have power, particularly when they have been raised from humble circumstances, to learn. When you are nobody, you have little obligation to society; your obligation may consist of not killing anyone you encounter, not stealing, and not drinking and brawling too often. Once you become the leader of something, you immediately become obligated to the people you are leading, and to the higher principles that you server. It is the failure to handle this obligation that causes political movements to fail. Someone who leads a political organization develops a moral obligation to their followers not to seek personal gain above the gains of the group. You cannot use the money you raise to buy a new car when you should be spending it on lobbying. You also must surrender the personal demands on your time to the demands placed on you by the group and its individual members. The members, by joining, pledge to work for you because you are the embodiment of a group spirit; you then have an obligation to embody that group spirit. If you do not embody the best interests of the group, the group will fail, because there is no reason for the members to continue their activity. ——- I think those five laws are probably a good start in this direction; I’m sure if I wasn’t dead tired I could conjure a few more. Time and time again, from the various communist movements I encountered in my youth to the Buchanan Reform 2000 campaign to some of the rightist groups I encounter now, I have found those who don’t understand these things. They pick friends— often people they have minor personality conflicts with within their movement— and treat them as enemies (leftist and rightist sectarianism, as well as the factional fights within the Reform Party all reflect these). They then take their enemies— the courts, the media, the Jewish group, the anti-racists, et cetera— and take them into their confidence in order to undermine some arbitrary “enemy” that would probably be friendly if the two could meet and talk together politely for an hour or so. In politics one also constantly sees public figures behaving immorally towards their own supporters, while attempting to court their enemies. There are many who think the function of a leader is to keep their own people in line while building bridges to the other camp; a real leader reflects the wants of their people and leads them into battle against the enemy. This duality is the basic conflict between the democratic and the socialist views of leadership; one is essentially reflective of an internal war over the degree of conformance to the enemy’s terms, while the other reflects internal unity and a desire to fight over real issues. The desire to attack the weak and pacify the strong is also a moral failing that arises from the submission of truth to mis-perceived “practical” reality. It is easy to hurt weak people; it is hard to hurt strong people. Thus, it is easy to be wicked, but it is hard to be good. Most people who want to “lead” something take the easy way and focus their energy on kicking those who won’t fight back; the courageous pick the biggest and strongest enemy they can find and start a fight. Sometimes the courageous win, and sometimes they lose; when the courageous win, they gain, and when they lose, they gain reputation for an honorable defeat. The weakling who pick on the even weaker always lose; when they “win”, they gain nothing, and when they lose, its often because an even bigger bully decided they were the weakling to kick around, and thus it is seen as a well deserved defeat. Loyalty is also something that has faded among most leaders. Many “leaders” think leadership is about self-gratification and loyalty to them; most don’t recognize that leadership is about self-sacrifice and loyalty to others which is only reciprocated in loyalty to them. Many would be leaders objectify those they lead; they see other people as objects without desires or souls. Real leaders recognize that human interaction is reciprocal, and that if you treat someone well, they return it. I know these types of things fall generally on deaf ears, but they are all important lessons in dealing in politics. Those who don’t know their enemies will often betray themselves to them. Those who don’t know their friends will often alienate those they should be leading. If you don’t know good people from bad people, and the proper relationships between them, you will not be able to succeed. So that is my advice for today. As I was writing this, I was informed that a newspaper has published a report confirming our statement yesterday that the National Alliance members in Milford, Massachusetts will not be prosecuted. Good for them ! ...