3,535 words
It must be accepted that racism and discrimination are often at the heart of why Black people face… inequalities and there are growing calls for racism to be regarded as a determinant of health to better understand this.
—Black Mental Health Manifesto
We must be mad, literally mad…
—Enoch Powell
***
Mens sana in corpore sano, wrote Juvenal in the tenth of his second-century Satires. “A healthy mind in a healthy body.” Today, mental health – at least in the UK – is a poor relation of bodily health, neglected and under-funded. This has to do with the primacy of the body in the modern Western consciousness, to the detriment of a similar amount of attention paid to the mind. People brag about going to the gym, but not to the library. Allan Bloom, in his famous book The Closing of the American Mind, notes that, although the students he was teaching (in the 1990s) knew exactly what a perfect body should look like, they had no conception that the same principle of perfectibility can also apply to the mind. It is as though the (in)famous mind/body problem that has plagued philosophy for so many centuries were being played out as a consumer choice, like meat or fish for dinner. Juvenal was not privileging either mind or body, simply showing the sense of balance endemic to the classical mind.
The result of Bloom’s observation—from the front line—is that students today, morons with perfect teeth, see the mind as a secondary concern, useful only to serve the body, although not necessarily to keep it from harm. But, the knotty problem of dualism versus monism aside, just as bodies malfunction and are damaged, so the mind runs exactly the same risk.
Mental health problems— or “issues”, in Newspeak—can affect anyone, regardless of gender or race, but we know better than to expect governmental policy on mental health to treat sufferers without fear or favor. Everyone (I am referring to the UK here, but I imagine it is the same all over) will want their slice of the pie, financially speaking, when it comes to doling out tax-payer money from the great soup-kitchen of the Royal Exchequer, but some voices will be louder than others when it comes to staking a claim to that money. And, when it comes to loud voices, blacks are not just noisy in the cinema or on public transport, and they know how to shout for gimmes when it comes to governmental budgets. I am sure you are familiar with a T-shirt I have seen online, usually worn by a fat, black woman, and which reads: BE QUIET. A BLACK WOMAN IS TALKING.
And don’t we just know it. When it comes to mental health, therefore, it is no surprise to hear black voices raised above the clamor for funding, and their women in particular.
Black activists in or around the medical profession in the UK recently released what is presumably intended as a consultative document, and whose subject matter is black mental health care. Note the title: Black Mental Health Manifesto (BMHM, you can download it here). The word “manifesto” already has political connotations, but those in politics are not the only ones who write them. School shooters and other spree killers often leave tawdry documents behind them (have you read a good one yet? Only the Unabomber’s is even mildly entertaining. Breivik’s reads like he was on drugs, which he was) which the press immediately label their “manifesto.” It is worth noting that, just as blacks have a greater tendency to physical aggression, so too their academic wing has a tendency to passive aggression. I suppose we are fortunate BMHM was not written in ebonics.
The authors make a special dispensation at the start of the document, welcoming other people into the coveted space of blackness. Black, BMHM’s introduction informs us, “is also a political term used to describe those who have experienced colonialism and anti-Black racism.” So, the gang’s all here. Black status: Provided whitey done bad by you and your kin, you’re in. The word “black”, incidentally, is given an upper-case initial letter throughout BMHM. I haven’t done so myself, other than in quotes, because it is incorrect usage, and in fact is nothing more than an instruction to the rest of the media from Associated Press (AP).
The introduction, as with the whole document, is written in technocratic chatter, the type that makes black people feel they are joining in because they are using the same words as those clever white people. After the initial claim that black people, when it comes to mental health, have special needs (who would deny that?), we have something approaching a mission statement:
The Black Mental Health Manifesto seeks to address [the problem of racial inequality] and to be a catalyst for […] change. This manifesto sets out demands to be undertaken by the government, commissioners, local service providers, practitioners, academic and educational institutions, VCSEs [not explained, but apparently standing for Voluntary, Community, and Social Enterprise], and other relevant bodies in order to work toward the betterment of mental health access, treatment and outcomes for Black [sic] people.
They may not be too keen on gainful employment themselves, but blacks will sure keep white people busy! Note how blacks never have “requests” or “recommendations”, but only ever demands. They are a very demanding people, and they have a lot to demand. “Mental health systems” BMHM continues, “have not been designed with Black people in mind and push harmful interventions that are based on white norms and standards.” Fortunately for their black brothers and sisters, the authors have come up with some modest proposals to right the racist wrongs in the field of mental health. In the long section entitled Addressing Structural Drivers, we begin with a demand that “The government should develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to eradicate racism from society and appoint a cabinet level minister to oversee this.”
Of course, in the current cabinet, that would be David Lammy, a gentleman who has been thoroughly profiled here at Counter-Currents and stupid even by the standards which obtain in black circles. It is impossible to “eradicate” racism in a society where so many people earn a living from finding it.
The second recommendation/demand under Addressing Structural Drivers is where things begin to get distinctly tribal: “The government should actively fund and co-design social prescribing approaches to mental health in Black communities.”
The section champions this “social prescribing” without explaining what it means:
Social prescribing encompasses prevention and early identification, decreasing the likelihood of escalation or the need for higher-level interventions at a later stage. Social prescribing that is offered to people must be based on their lived experience and be culturally affirming in order for it to be relevant…
That old devil called “lived experience” again. Shall I tell you what “lived experience” means in the context of BMHM? Ultimately, it means listening to black people whining about oppression. That’s what lived experience means for blacks because they have been taught that’s what it means, what life is. Oppression or its whip-marks, which apparently travel down through generations like a hare-lip, and all black “lived experience” can be assumed to be heavily influenced by the inherited wealth of oppression and racism. Not meted out to them, not actually a part of their personal lived experience, but taken on and worn like a mantle passed down from their ancestors. Primitive peoples are known for their beliefs in the uncanny powers of long-dead ancestors, and this is just another example of tribal lore. And who teaches them? The same shaman who is going to be doing, who already is doing, the social prescribing: “Within the Black community, there are trusted community leaders who unofficially undertake the role of social prescribers.”
And there are doubtless still African tribes who have witch-doctors. The role is the same. Tribes are structural (as the old structuralist anthropologist Claude Lévi-Strauss discovered) and tribal behavior can be congruent even if one tribe is in sub-Saharan Africa and another is in Peckham in London, or Chicago, or some other black-run pigsty.
The process of “social prescribing”, although we don’t know what it is, is “non-clinical.” So, let’s sum up. The “black community” (which puts the moron in oxymoron) are going to operate a diagnostic process completely under their own auspices. All they want from white people is money to pay the village wise-man, who is currently working for free. Let’s move on.
The fourth “Structural Driver” is a sop thrown to the new arrivals, the new blacks in town. Blacks don’t like immigrants because they sense, somewhere in their mammalian brain, a competitor for resources. But it is another chance to have a dig at whitey, so what the hell:
The government should put an end to ‘hostile environment’ policies which harm or exacerbate mental health problems amongst refugees, asylum-seekers and migrants in the UK.
The new arrivals apparently record higher levels of mental health problems, including Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), than whoever it is they are calling the native population these days. I think many of us might have a touch of PTSD after a 20-mile ride across the English Channel sitting on the rim of a blow-up boat with 60 other blokes, but the idea of Britain as a “hostile environment” for migrants entering illegally would be laughable if it weren’t so insulting. What’s the matter, did Ahmed not have a complimentary chocolate on his pillow when he checked in to his 4-star hotel? Britain is not a hostile environment, it’s just importing people who will make it so.
Our next “Structural Driver” in the Stations of the Black Cross is, of course, the “Windrush generation”, or “Windrush victims”, as the authors term the luckiest blacks in British history. I wrote at Counter-Currents about HM Windrush, but it is enough to say that, once again, British blacks have turned one of the greatest slices of good fortune in their history into yet another tale of oppression and racism. The “Windrush scandal” that inevitably harked back to the boat’s arrival – a bad day in British naval history – was entirely manufactured, and just another “gimme” gesture from melanin-enhanced entrepreneurs. The Windrush arrivals, according to BMHM, apparently faced “being forcibly separated from their families”, despite the documented fact that all the blacks on that boat responded to an ad for cheap transit, and bought a ticket to a better life. But, as Solzhenitsyn wrote, if the truth doesn’t suit you, then away with the truth!
The next bullet-point (that seems appropriates for blacks) on this inventory of grievance is that both the government and charitable donors “should devolve and distribute power, knowledge, resources and funding for organizations led by and for Black communities.” That’s right. They want whites to take care of black problems. The reason for this devolution is obvious, of course:
Black-led organisations often have the solutions to the challenges faced by their communities but are held back due to the lack of resources, particularly the lack of sustainable funding.
Black Lives Matter was the last major black-led organization of note, and that was later exposed as a huge slush fund for some fat black woman’s property portfolio. In England, female BLM activists simply get shot in the head by their fellow blacks, (Sasha Johnson is still alive, apparently, albeit as a vegetable costing white people a lot of money to keep her alive), but they still made money. For themselves. Organization, at least with integrity and financial probity, is just not a black thing. Whites know it but can’t say it, and some blacks know it but won’t say it.
The main problem facing the authors of BMHM is how to rephrase the following sentence without sounding repetitive: Give more money to black people. Investment – a key word here but entirely the wrong one – has to have a purpose, and since there is no conceivable reason why anyone would want to invest in any black enterprise, the black caucus reverts to its ready-to-hand moral argument: Mental health problems disproportionately impact blacks because of the past actions of whites. The following is a paragraph of such philosophical audacity Nietzsche would have been proud of it:
Institutional racism permeates all levels of our society, and the research and policy sectors are no exceptions. Colonialism has had a significant influence on knowledge production and perception of what is deemed to be ‘valuable’ and ‘legitimate’, resulting in the establishment of racial hierarchies of knowledge (Almeida, 2015; Ndlovu, 2018). This has meant that particular forms of knowledge and knowledge production may be valued more highly depending on the individual or institution that generated it. [Italics added].
Racial hierarchies of knowledge certainly exist, but the striation in the levels is not inherent in the knowledge involved, nor is it the result of its being processed. The argument of “racial hierarchies of knowledge” fulfils two roles. Firstly, it is the precursor to the “my truth/your truth” epistemological perversion prevalent in Critical Race Theory (otherwise known as “standpoint epistemology”, which is related to the “lived experience” trope). Secondly, it assumes that knowledge perceived and processed in different ways dictated by pre-existing racial disparities are actually different types of knowledge valued differently. This is beyond insane, it is so relativist it has come out the other side.
It must always be remembered that blacks are essentially children. In fact, the case is more serious. I’m not a parent myself, but I gather that there are advantages as well as trials to having children: reciprocal love, watching the formation of a personality, a sense of a shared tradition, simply enjoying your child as a parent. It isn’t like that with blacks, they are children of a different kind, more like Auden’s children in September 1, 1939:
Lost in a haunted wood,
Children afraid of the night
Who have never been happy or good.
Blacks are led to believe that the one thing they have is their pride. But they don’t have pride. They merely have no shame, and it’s not the same thing.
By the time we reach the concluding section, the anti-white rhetoric ratchets up even higher. Now we are talking about “Eurocentric norms and values” and “eugenics.” With reference to mental health care, that most delicate of medical areas, would African norms and values be better? There have already been cases of witchcraft in the UK, so why not give African methodology and rationality a go on the pool table? Fortunately, as so often, black people themselves have the answer:
The government should establish a non-ambiguous definition of mental health and social prescribing [Note: Even though it is never explained], one that is holistic [a word many people use with absolutely no idea of its actual meaning], culturally appropriate, and moved away from culture of blame.”
We got there in the end. The final destination of black pleading is always an impolite request—otherwise known as an order—to stop blaming blacks for their plight. There is a simple formula which can always be applied to black notions of cause and effect: A successful black outcome is due inherently to the quality of blackness, while an unsuccessful outcome is not due to a failure of same, but always and in every case due to (but never traceable to) white racism and oppression. You did good? You black. You did bad? Whitey’s fault.
Black men don’t suffer from schizophrenia in far greater numbers than whites because of bad juju or the wrath of God. Many of them end up with this diagnosis due to long-term cannabis use, something veteran journalist Peter Hitchens has tried to draw attention to for years, although he doesn’t mention blacks as he presumably wishes to keep his gig with The Daily Mail. And let’s also look at two specific areas of health which are singled out for special treatment based on skin color in BMHM. Obesity and diabetes are not mental health problems, so don’t really belong in a mental health manifesto, but one thing they are is diet-linked conditions. They depend on personal agency, which is something neither white or black liberals believe black people have. Sometimes known as the bigotry of low expectations, this liberal pathogen is bad for both blacks and whites. It hurts those blacks self-aware enough to know that they got their job because of their position on the DEI color swatch and not because their employer felt at the interview that they might be good at it. It hurts whites in the same way anything connected with blacks hurts whites, eventually. Where blacks are concerned, we can’t live with them and we definitely can’t live without them. We’re not allowed to. One of the main reasons I have lived in poverty 5,000 miles away from my home town of London for a decade is that I very rarely see a black person. If I do (the Caribbean is only a stone’s throw away), they act normally, not like British blacks. Also, I have met two Muslims here in 10 years, both charming men, one of whom employed me as a musician for a season in what was then the largest hotel in Costa Rica. A negligible amount of black faces, and two Muslims in 10 years. Just the way I like it.
By the time we reach BMHM’s concluding section, we have moved away from the tedious subject of mental health and onto wider societal concerns. Money should be diverted from prisons, policing and surveillance, which the report takes for granted are all racist, and mental health concerns can still be tacked on as a token because “increased negative interactions with the police increase the risks of mental health problems.” Again, black cause and effect is very different to ours, like the difference between Arabic musical scales and our own Western tonic arrangements. We can hear that it is still music, it’s just not the way we play it. Blacks have more “negative interactions” with the police because they commit more crime, but that is an ineligible factor under black causality. On with BMHM’s program for a black-oriented societal year zero.
All schools should “develop and embed an anti-racist and diverse school curriculum that incorporates the histories and contributions of all racialized communities in the UK,” the report rants on. Well, surely not all “racialized communities”? Whites are no longer a race in the eyes of the people who sew reports like this together, they are a category now, that of oppressor, and they certainly aren’t allowed to have a “community.” White community, so the black village elders say, is what got black people in so much trouble in the first place. Speaking of trouble, the report also wants school exclusions abolished, meaning any troublesome student would no longer be taken out of the classroom, but will be left free to disrupt other students. You don’t need to go scurrying for the nearest sociologist to tell you who the disruptive students generally are, in ethnic terms, and anyway that sociologist would only lie to you. Every teacher in Britain who has to teach a mixed-race class – that would be all of them – knows where the trouble is coming from in the classroom today. Finally, on the point of an anti-racist, pro-black curriculum, don’t you people read the newspapers? Even the MSM has noticed that modern schools are essentially teaching African history “Wakandized” and transferred to the history of Britain, where blacks apparently built and invented everything from Stonehenge to the Industrial Revolution and beyond. So BMHM is a little late on that one.
Final demands for a raft of legislation include
…the statutory offer of Advance Choice Documents (ACDs) for those previously or currently detained under the Mental Health Act so that they can have a better say in the cars and support they receive should they ever lose the capacity to decide for themselves.
That isn’t quite how working practices are in mental health care. People who have been “sectioned” (referring to Section 8 of the 1983 Mental Health Act) have been deemed insane by the state and its functionaries. That’s what legislation means. Giving informed choice to an insane person over anything more important than breakfast just displays an ignorance of the whole structure of mental health and its dysfunctions.
Finally, we’ll go back at the introduction to BMHM, where a criticism of a previous government document on mental health gives the underlying meaning of this one:
[M]ental health systems, regulations and standards have not been designed with black people in mind and push harmful interventions that are based on white norms and standards. An example can be seen in the government Wellbeing and Mental Health: Applying All Health Guidance 2022 (Office for Health Improvement and Disparities, 2022) which omits racism as one of the social risk factors.” [Italics added]
The suggestion is that racism – which has no objective definition – should become a clinical indicator. Fine. So can any other abstract, groundless factor.
This document, should you dislike yourself enough to want to read it (and I have tried to spare you this ordeal), will make you very angry. I would welcome a similar report on the harm done by blacks to white people’s mental health.
16 comments
[M]ental health systems, regulations and standards have not been designed with black people in mind and push harmful interventions that are based on white norms and standards.
Sounds like they are admitting that there are differences between the races—great article. 🙃
Cheers, Quint. You are one hard motherfucker to please.
Blacks have no pride, they just have no shame? True, they certainly have no shame, but if pride is the same as self esteem I would argue that blacks have plenty of that. My teacher buddy always told me that the dumbest kid in the class always has the highest self esteem. Makes sense.
BIPOC mental health communities are pretty lolworthy. They schism away from the other mental health hugboxes because they’re just seething and full of actual, burning hatred. A guilty pleasure of mine is going trawling through them for lolworthy people to gawk at.
Take a look at this community, “CPTSD_BIPOC” here’s the titles of some of the top posts of all time
https://www.reddit.com/r/cptsd_bipoc/top/?t=all
The titles are as follows
-“I hate white people”
-“I hate white people”
-“why are white women so mean to me”
-“White people are going to have to prove to me they’re not racist”
-“r/CPTSD is no longer a safe space to me and this is disappointing.” (the one non-seething post at white people here in the top five, but even then if you read it it’s whining about how they can’t dehumanize whites elsewhere)
-“I hate white women”
….
-“White women are very, very overrated in terms of beauty”
…
-“The OGs were right.. white people ruin everything”
-“I Wish White Women Would Understand Their White Privilege”
You get the idea. They use dehumanizing language towards whites that if reversed, would absolutely get them banned. “Snowroach” being one such term I seen on the subreddit. There’s a sort of comedic irony in that they are so hateful and full of spite, but have this facade of compassionate caring about mental health and feeling sorry for one another’s suffering.
The brunt of their hatred seems to be towards white women for some reason. Why? I’m not sure exactly, I guess because they’re mostly women. If you go snooping through some of the posts for a while, you’ll find out so many are actually dating white men or posting elsewhere about how they are wanting to date whites. Which is pretty dark, imagine your girlfriend being the sort of person to post this unhinged stuff on the internet. You always inevitably find these sorts of psychosexual complexes when you go scratching into ethnic racial grievance politics.
Are they actually mentally ill though? I don’t really think so, at least not to a degree that prevents them from functioning in society at all. There’s little to no discussion of medication, times in the psyche ward , episodes of psychosis or living in poverty. Actual mental health communities tend to have welfare guides, suicide methods, alcoholism and medication threads up constantly, and there’s none of that on there. It seems to me that mental health is just a socially acceptable way for them to be able to express anti-white hatred.
They seethe, constantly. That’s their thing. And you’re right, the mental-health angle is just a ruse to vent and spew. People who are that constantly consumed with spite are dangers to the objects of that spite (if I may be Captain Obvious for a moment).
Also, one of the most genuinely cringeworthy things imaginable is the impotent litany of names they come up with for whites. They’re so contrived and fall so flat that I genuinely (almost) feel embarassed for them; yet, true to form, in their minds they’ve just coined a term of utter brilliance.
What a peculiar and burdensome race.
Mayo monkey!
Lol. Yes…”Exhibit ‘A'”.
Are they actually mentally ill though? I don’t really think so, at least not to a degree that prevents them from functioning in society at all. They’re just worthless scum. It’s the deathly lost Whites who are mentally ill and belong in padded rooms for the feebleminded for the endless suicidal coddling of feral nigger bullshit.
“This document… will make you very angry.”
Yes, because it will be treated as holy writ (or at least given lip service to that effect) whose costs will be loaded by traitorous elites onto the backs of the overburdened, long-suffering British people, rather than it being given the derision it deserves.
One thing I learned at an early age, there is rampant homosexuality among black men. A well known black rapper has posted about this on Twitter. This may account for some of the racial insecurity.
Black, black, black, black, black. Blackness the center of the universe. Blackness up the wazoo. More black than I can hack. Can the ruling elite give us some more blacks?
https://youtu.be/uwSZ_Gs3YcQ?si=eoFHbJvDXIsthazN&t=238s
Not even Monty Python could outdo the absurdity of this BMHM thing. The sheer effrontery in that epic of Afro-dyspepsia is truly stunning indeed. Who do these people think they are? What tremendous value do they believe they’re bringing to Britain with their very presence? Why does anyone take those clowns seriously?
I hope, sir, you will enjoy my next piece, what with you having mentioned Monty Python. It’s about Fawlty Towers. You make an excellent point about the surrealist element creeping in to the modern world.
“A healthy mind in a healthy body.”
—
That’s all well and good. Ben Klassen added the requirement “in a healthy society.” In the long run multiracial society is not healthful for Whites. That is common sense to racial nationalists.
—
Where blacks are concerned, we can’t live with them and we definitely can’t live without them…
—
Surely we can live without them — those of us who have the will and the determination to do so. The only solution to White separation is racial separation, Fact!
Klassen famously asked, “Who needs niggers?” What is the answer to that? Who? Why?
I think Klassen died in 1993. What in the fuck would he, Bob Mathews, David Lane—hell, even Dan Burros—and the other militant men cut of superior cloth, think of not just our current putrid state of defeatism but the suicidal refusal to fight back? Big Brothers and the commissariats’ panopticon watching didn’t stop the Hungarians in 1956 when it became intolerable. I’m 41 and have long grown tired of the ‘from my cold dead hands, tree of liberty, these colors don’t run’ tough guy talk from Mr. 1776 hat and cadres of bloviating do-nothing useless republican bullshitters. When does it begin? After another round of blm ooks burning cities when the EBT shutdown occurs? Sometimes I wish Whites had the balls to chimp out like urban quashies do. They might actually gain some respect and be feared for once.
Uncle Semantic: October 30, 2025 I think Klassen died in 1993. What in the fuck would he, Bob Mathews, David Lane—hell, even Dan Burros—and the other militant men cut of superior cloth, think of not just our current putrid state of defeatism but the suicidal refusal to fight back?
—
Yes, Klassen was born 105 years ago in 2018, the same year as Rockwell. Unlike Rockwell, however, whose life was cut short, Ben Klassen led a full life. They were not perfect men — who is? — but courageous racial loyalists and both made great contributions to our cause. We stand on their shoulders. Mathews and Lane were “militant men cut of the same superior cloth,” as you say. I would not include the Jewish “Nazi wannabe” Burros in with their names. There are too many others more deserving to be on your list.
—
When does it begin?… Sometimes I wish Whites had the balls to chimp out like urban quashies do. They might actually gain some respect and be feared for once.
—
Unc, You’re 41, with lots of apparent experience, a healthful, militant attitude, and have had a bellyful of defeatism from your kinsmen and their racial leaders. It’s not “balls” that count so much as being confident and right, and I don’t mean right-wing.
In 1988, when I had become Klassen’s XO, I corresponded with David Lane and other imprisoned men of Mathews’ abortive Bruder Schweigen, aka The Order. David learned from me that I was 41 at the time and told me that is the “perfect age” to be involved in our cause. I had only been involved at higher levels for three or four years at the time but remember that David told me that. Now I tell you the same thing. Three or so years later, after I’d been hired to be William Pierce’s XO, I talked by phone with David at his maximum-security Marion prison. What a privilege.
Take your militancy and knowledge and channel it into positive work. You do that to some extent here at C-C., but If I can offer you some good advice, read and comprehend the advice William Pierce offered to his National Alliance members in January 1994. It is good advice that you might appreciate. Don’t waste your life by “chimping out” in frustration and anger: “Reorienting Ourselves for Success” at nationalvanguard.org
by Dr. William L. Pierce, introduced by Kevin Alfred Strom
IN JANUARY, 1994, Dr. William Pierce, the founder of the National Alliance wrote an editorial which has, until this month, never publicly seen the light of day. It’s titled “Reorienting Ourselves for Success.” It’s all about improving ourselves so that we may become better recruiters for the one cause that really matters.
It was published only in our internal National Alliance BULLETIN, which is sent via postal mail each month to our members and supporters, and has also never been issued in audio form as a part of these American Dissident Voices broadcasts. It’s time that it took its place on the ADV and National Vanguard rosters of truly great works.
It was transcribed for the first time in digital form by Ray W. and placed on the National Alliance social and educational forum whitebiocentrism.com last month. I have created an audio version, using Artificial Intelligence to recreate Dr. Pierce’s own voice, as I have done with several other pieces now.
When I re-read it for the first time a week and a half ago when our Chairman decided to include it in last month’s issue of the BULLETIN, I was impressed. It is great writing — and great leadership. We are not recruiting members as fast as we ought to be. And the flaw is mainly in ourselves, and is also, most importantly, correctable. Dr. Pierce shows us how to make the changes we need to make to succeed…
Shortened for brevity. Read Dr. Pierce’s full commentary at the link. He concludes with:
… Think of all these things. Meditate on them. Talk about them with friends, if that helps. Let these considerations sweep away every trace of pessimism and defeatism in you and replace it with the certainty that we will win, no matter how long it takes and no matter what we must do. Understand this clearly and believe it strongly, and those you are trying to recruit will feel it. Then you will be successful in your recruiting.
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.