Propaganda
Exploring the Half Truths and Lies
BACK
MORE
Subject: Equality the deadly Myth From: Sent: 4/7/00 6:58 pm All racial differences are either genetic (hereditary, inborn) or cultural (acquired from society after birth). The latter can be changed or eliminated by enforced social changes; the former are independent of man's laws and customs, except over a period of many generations. Examples of cultural traits which differ from race to race are mannerisms of speech ("Amos 'n' Andy" dialect or "Black English"), styles of dress, and personal grooming. If Blacks and Whites are forced to live together from birth, attending the same schools and exposed to exactly the same cultural influences, they will grow up speaking and dressing in very nearly the same manner. Even Blacks who have grown up in the tribal areas of Africa and who customarily distort their earlobes or lips with huge wooden plugs or plaster their hair with liquid cow dung as a means of attracting Blacks of the opposite sex can be trained to adopt White standards of personal cleanliness and grooming. The fact is, however, that the most important racial differences are genetic rather than cultural. Skin and eye color, facial features, skull shape, skeletal proportions, patterns of body fat disposition, tooth size, jaw shape, female breast form, odor, and hair texture are only the most noticeable genetically determined physical characteristics which differ racially. Beyond these things are the entire biochemical constitution and development of the individual. There are profound racial differences in blood chemistry, in endocrine function, and in physiological response to environmental stimuli. Blacks and Whites mature at different rates. They have different susceptibilities to many disease organisms as well as different patterns of congenital disease. They even have different nutritional requirements. Racial differences, in other words, are much more than skin deep; they permeate the individual and are manifested in virtually every cell of his body. They are the products of millions of years of separate evolutionary development which has adapted the different races, with considerable precision to different environmental demands. When we understand the all pervading nature of genetic racial differences, we can see that cultural racial differences are not so superficial as some would have us believe. Far from masking any fundamental "equality" or exaggerating racial dissimilarities, they simply manifest the genetic differences of which they are, in fact, expressions. The culture of a race, free of alien influences, is telling evidence of that race's essential nature. The African Negro with a cow-dung hairdo, a bone through his nose, and teeth filed down to sharp points, in other words, presents to us a far more accurate image of the Negro essence than does the American Black in a business suit who has been trained to drive an automobile, operate a typewriter, and speak flawless English. Negro culture is not merely DIFFERENT from White culture; it is a LESS ADVANCED culture and, by practically any standard, INFERIOR. It is a culture which never advanced to the point of a written language or a civilized society. It never saw even the barest glimmerings of mathematics or the invention of the wheel. The smelting and use of metals and the quarrying and dressing of stone for architectural purposes are crafts that were taught to the Negro by members of other races. The hokum currently being served up in the schools about a centuries-old Negro "civilization" based on the ruins of stone walls found at Zimbabwe, is simply the product of wishful thinking by proponents of racial equality who are willing to ignore all facts which conflict with their equalitarian mania. Negro culture inferiority is the consequence of the physical inadequacy of the Negro brain in dealing with abstract concepts. On the other hand, the Negro shows an ability approaching that of the White at mental tasks requiring only memory. That is why the Negro can be trained relatively easily to adapt to many aspects of White culture. His verbal ability and his ability to imitate allow him, when properly motivated, to assume much of the outward appearance of "equality." In a decade of special college-admission quotas for Blacks, many thousands of Blacks have obtained college diplomas -- but only in those disciplines in which a glib tongue and a good memory suffice. There have been virtually no Black graduates in the physical sciences and very few in engineering. Thus the Negroes inability to handle the abstract concepts required in problem-solving and technological innovation make a mockery of outward appearances. And this inability is genetic in nature, rooted in the physical structure of the Negro brain. Until the post-World War II campaign to blend the White and Negro races began in earnest, the Negro's mental limitations were common knowledge. The 11th edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica, for example, says of the Negro, in part: "...Other characteristics appear to be hypertrophy of the organs of excretion, a more developed venous system, and a less voluminous brain, as compared with the White races." "In certain of the characteristics mentioned above the Negro would appear to stand on a lower evolutionary plane than the White man, and to be more closely related to the highest anthropoids ...." "Mentally the Negro is inferior to the White ... While with the latter the volume of the brain grows with the expansion of the brainpan, in the former the growth of the brain is on the contrary arrested by the premature closing of the cranial sutures and lateral pressure of the frontal bone." And the 1932 edition of the Encyclopedia Americana lists, among the distinguishing characteristics of the Negro race, the following: "3. Weight of brain, 35 ounces (in gorilla 20 ounces, average Caucasian 45 ounces) ...." "8. Exceedingly thick cranium, enabling him to use the head as a weapon of attack ...." "14. The cranial sutures, which close much earlier in the Negro than in other races." As the media stepped up their flow of "equality" propaganda, later editions of these encyclopedias simply deleted the racial data on Blacks. One had to turn to specialized medical texts to learn that the associative areas of the brain, where abstract thought takes place, are less developed in the Negro than in the White. It has been well known since the large-scale intelligence testing of U.S. Army recruits in World War I that the average Negro IQ is approximately 15 per cent below that of the average White. Apologists for the Blacks have tried to explain away the earlier test scores as being due to the effects of segregated schools and Black poverty; i.e. they claimed the tests were "culturally biased." Later IQ tests, however, showed essentially the same degree of Black deficiency in IQ: whether Black graduates of integrated high schools were tested against White graduates of the same schools, or Blacks in a certain socio-economic category against similarly categorized Whites, the Blacks always scored substantially lower, even though standard IQ tests measure memory skills as well as purely associative ability. Tests which focus on the latter type of mental function show a much larger difference between Black and White scores. But it is precisely the ability to associate concepts, to deal with abstractions, to mentally extrapolate the present into the future that has allowed the White race to build and maintain its civilization, and it is the Negro's deficiency in this regard which kept him in a state of savagery in his African environment and is now undermining the civilization of a racially mixed America. That is why it is vitally important for every White person to understand that there can be no such thing as "equality" between Whites and Blacks, regardless of the amount of racial mixing forced on Americans by the government.
GOD'S ORDER AFFIRMED IN LOVE REFERENCE LIBRARY for Reconstructing a National Identity for Christians Know Yourself | Know Your Enemy Uncommon History | News Perspective Resources for Reform | Preterism CR, Theonomy and Reformed Links The Problem with Protestant Orthodoxy So-Called "White Supremacy" Defined Manifesto of Christian Government -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Defining Our Purpose WITHOUT A VISION, WE PERISH We seek to rebuild the foundations and re-establish a new bold vision for the Christian ethic in the world today. Our Christian duty is to provide a better world for future generations - for kith and kin and then the rest of the world. We cannot be light unto other nations until we first heal ourselves. We were called to take dominion and subdue the Earth for God's glory. If we hope to become the world leaders of tommorow we must define our goals, plan and take action. This is our duty, our purpose, and challenge to the Caucasian people of the world. Christianity has historically been a religion of the white race regardless of how hard whites have tried to convert the world. (see Christianity - Religion of the West and the Israel-Identity.FAQ. We desire a pro-active and optimistic Christian agenda. The document How to Defeat the Radical Right in Your Community should motivate Christians to provide an alternative agenda by and for Christians to reform or constrain the Criminal Left. Also, the book The Technology of Illegitimate Power by Ivor Benson should inspire a desire to develop a Technology of legitimate Power". It needs to address all areas of life because God is Sovereign over all life. This Library is for those who desire to work for God's Order Affirmed in Love! THE ANTIDOTE TO DEFEATISM Another needed reform is our understanding of prophecy and the end-times. Preterism is the antidote for the most crippling false doctrine castrating the body of Christ - Pessimillennialism. The despair addicts need weaning from their doom and gloom eschatology and shown the power and accomplished victory of Christ's Salvation. Our Preterist Resources section offers alternatives to the futurist dispensational eschatologies. The end of the "world", the "last days", etc. spoken of in Bible prophecy are historical accomplished facts. Those with a futuristic view of these issues should read our Q and A for futurists. RACIAL PRESERVATION Finally, we need a preservationist ethic to replace the Racial Nihilistic Judeo-liberal, "tolerant", egalitarianism that is destroying the races as God created them. Nationalism must be extended beyond "patriotism" for one's country. The Christian West will not be saved by "America", or any other government, but by the concertive effort of all white nations under the Sovereign God's direction. With the advances in global commerce, communications & transportation we must speak to our international "nation" of Christian-whites throughout the world if we are to stay competitive in the marketplace of ideas. In addition to being grounded upon a Biblical foundation Reconstruction must be built upon preserving our families which includes the greater racial family (nation) that we were born into. The Racial Compact by Richard McCulloch does a great job in presenting model legislation and moral justification for such an ethic. His ideas within a Christian foundation will be very productive in diffusing the meaningless "racism" charge while presenting a sane racial preservationalist ethic. MOVING FORWARD The way to turn the tide is to march upstream with theonomic counter-proposals toward all opposition. The only ideas that matter are those that put forth positive solutions for change. We must work for reformation, not revolution -- build and reform rather than tear down and pervert. Without a vision our people perish. Without faith, hope and love they are disarmed and don't change the world. Without visible duplicatable leadership by example people become inactive, weaponless and lose the "spiritual" battle against the anti-God forces of the world. Without prayer, preaching, instruction and song they are without motivation, power and guidance. Without a God centered faith and conviction of Jesus the Christ's total Sovereignty over all of life there is no hope and belief that He saves His people and that we will overcome. Dedicated to applying the two Greatest Commandments - Respect for the Creator's eternal Theocracy, the order He established, and preservation of the purity and diversity of His creation. Working to put God first in all things and fighting to "secure the existence of our people and a future for white children". We are calling for Christian Activism in defense of all that is holy, pure and sacred.
ARYAN UNITY ON-LINE NEWSLETTER No.4 - 5th May 2001 ON UNITY IN THE UNITED KINGDOM When I started to write this newsletter it was with the wild and naive thought in mind that the various organisations representing the bulk of White activists in Britain could actually sit around a table at a conference Aryan Unity would be proud to host and hammer out a way to foster both cooperation and eventually a united party. It was done in 1967, when the BNP of John Bean, the Greater Britain Movement, the League of Empire Loyalists of A.K Chesterton, the Racial Preservation Society and some smaller groups actually buried ALL personal differences and formed the National Front which grew in the 1970's to challenge ZOG on a formidable scale. Now in 2001, with the walls closing in on what's left of our Northern racial homelands - could this happen again? We would be very stupid to think it could. Personality differences and the new "euro-nationalist/populist" image (foisted by one man!) preclude a real eyeball to eyeball discussion on something that 90% of the activists want - UNITY! Or does it? Is it possible that these same activists could vote with their feet and force the leaders of the various organisations to come to the table and bury ALL personal diffrences in the interests of the Fourteen Words? Surely the future of just one White child is more important than the petty slanging matches that constantly besmirch our great cause? It will not happen overnight, but as we have stated it REALLY did happen in 1967, so why not again? We would add the important overider though that any future united party MUST stick to:- a) Repatriation b) Total opposition to faggots c) Street presence as the racial situation continues to deteriorate (Oldham/Bradford etc) The embattled Whites of the UK DO NOT WANT a namby pamby elections only Movement. They want a White Nationalist movement that is out there WITH THEM on the front line! Whatever the outcome, Aryan Unity will continue to hammer away until we create a unity breakthrough - and eventually one too that unites Aryan Resistance fighters throughout the world!
White "Walking Time Bomb" Madness - our last, best chance? Fipstradamos (Nationalist Observer)15 Mar 00 White "Walking Time Bomb" Madness is a stronger-than-steel tension that begins mounting early in life. More than white-hot fury, it's a simmering brew about jew-society's anti-white race-based inequities. It intermittently rises to near-boil -- threatening to break the surface -- then may settle down again. One day the anger that has darkened and then frozen over into cold hatred suddenly erupts to the surface with volcanic mad intent to kill the entire repulsive world - and yet this itself may be the last great hope of white mankind. Imagine having your racially-superior talents, desires, dreams, opinions and workplace contributions shat upon by the Jew puppetmasters and their lickeys, who then laugh at you when you quite rationally point out how irrational it is to promote the inferior, simply because their skin is brownblack. Consider the young white man walking down the hallway of his high school, knowing his I.Q. of 125 is higher than 99% of the Jegro population, but that it doesn't matter, "cause wese all bese equals!" - except that you know the more-equal-than others Jews will give every job they can to the abnormal, the freakish, depraved, and "persons of color" - simply to show they can do it, and that there is nothing you can do about it - except commit murder. You say to yourself - "God, they all deserve, they all NEED to die!". Everyone knows deep inside that the person of color is basically a feral animal that may occasionally come up and let you pet it - but may just as likely bite off your hand - even if it is the hand that feeds it! - the very next instant. Rational people of EVERY race are usually circumspect enough around these beasties to stay alive from day to day. Ah, but why don't they fear the calm, rational-appearing white man? Why do the puppetmasters think that the white man "is no threat"? The white man doesn't drool from his animal fangs, foam at the mouth "crazy-nigger"-like, or go goo-goo-eyed with blood vessels popping out everywhere - and so he isn't acceptably feared. There are yet FAR TOO FEW who say "we cankst all gets along wid de whites"...Perhaps the young white men in our nation's schools (NOT geniuses but with intelligence exceeding 95% of all brownblacks and blackbrowns!) who have gone "cafeteria/postal" sense this in the depths of their souls, and say, "What the fuck!...Nothing else seems to get their attention!". White madness may erupt in tears of disbelief when, for example, a white man who defended his wife from niggermonster rape is given a life sentence without the possibility of parole for "hate crimes", or when a white man who says nigger to a nigger is "offered" a 10 year "hate" sentence on the very same day that same nigger's soul-less brotha drags a white child to mutilated death, shoots a six-year old white girl in the head for refusing to give head, or shoots every white HE can see - only to "see" that the Jewsmedia will not show the killer's photo or to hear that "the crimes are deemed by authorities (presumably with Jewish thumbs up their asses threatening to pull out a plum!) to have nothing to do with race". For Fuggin' Satan's sake, EVERYTHING a nigger does has to do with race! When one hears that yet another "white man" is being "investigated" for "hate crimes" that only two generations ago would have been deemed utter defense of the race...when one hears blacks complain that police stop them while investigating violent rape, murder, and mutilation, for the sole reason that almost every such vile act is committed by a jig...when whitey is then "historically blamed" for one jig raping his black girlfriend's little black daughter in the bathtub - one may yet see "a very different kind of rage" -- the cold rampage, finally released by society's own inverted combination of strictures upon the good and noble and total freedom for the cannibal baby-raper. That sense of insane "treatment" by society is at the root of white madness, and such a good white man no longer dreams of "equality of opportunity" or "tolerance of difference" - but perhaps even unwillingly...of oceans of black and brown blood. I once spoke with Ted Watkins, the most important black leader in South Central L.A. in the 70s. He told me how much he feared for an America in which "people would be forced to get along", rather than choosing of their own free will to do so, or not, as the case may be and nature itself may finally dictate. He was an unlettered man, yet one who knew the real score of a hideous "progressive" society, which, day by day, progresses only unto the public toilet, and the "Jewspeak"...of an eternal 1984. White explosive madness may thus be the key ingredient in voiding from the national body the vomitous poisons "our next great President Al Gore our Whore" will fester the nation with -"by every means necessary to ensure that white flight does not continue to harm the inner city or outlying natural environments". You see, whites have no "right" to flee transparently evil negritude, they have no rights to flee AIDS-ridden "urban freedom" districts, no rights to prevent their kids from being dropped into the filth of integrated schools, no rights to offend "the immigrant community" or the Jew shit-on-display "arts" community...no rights to DO ANYTHING, except be raped, mutilated...and to die. Yes, Virginia, there's a time for self-control like a good white man...and then there's a time to kill everything in sight...just so they can no longer deny that "we cankst all jes' gits along!"... And let your madness be "moved" to inaction only by the sight of white parents playing with their children, or noting the tiny joys of white home life glimpsed throughout the windows of the folken in evening's mists. Judgement be upon us - our own judgement, that is!
The measure of greatness NATIONAL VANGUARD Editorial from 1989 April 20 of this year is the 100th anniversary of the birth of the greatest man of our era -- a man who dared more and achieved more, who set his aim higher and climbed higher, who felt more deeply and stirred the souls of those around him more mightily, who was more closely attuned to the Life Force which permeates our cosmos and gives it meaning and purpose, and did more to serve that Life Force, than any other man of our times. And yet he is the most reviled and hated man of our times. Only a few tens of thousands of men and women, in scattered groups around the world, will celebrate his birthday with love and reverence on April 20, while all of the scribblers and commentators of the controlled news media, the controlled politicians, and the controlled churchmen will pour out their hatred and venom and lies against him, and those lies will be believed by hundreds of millions. What is the measure of greatness in a man? Only the most vulgar and doctrinaire democrat would seriously equate greatness with popularity -- although in any polling of average citizens on their choice for the greatest man of the century there are certain to be substantial numbers of votes for Elvis Presley, John Kennedy, Billy Graham, Michael Jackson, and various other high-visibility lightweights: charismatic entertainers on the stage of politics, rock concerts, spectator sports, or what have you. More serious citizens would pass by the lightweights and choose men who have changed the world in some way. We would hear choices like Franklin Roosevelt ("he saved the world from fascism"), Albert Einstein ("he taught us about the nature of our universe"), and Martin Luther King ("he helped us achieve racial justice"), depending upon whether one's personal inclinations lay more in the direction of politics, science, or racial self-abasement, respectively. But if the poll asked instead for the most evil man of the century, or the most hated man, or the man having the most negative influence, at least three-quarters of the blue-collar and the white-collar pollees alike would name one man: Adolf Hitler. This, however, would be merely a reflection of the role assigned to him by the controlled mass media, rather than a truly informed and reasoned choice. All of this raises several very interesting issues. There is, for example, the question of how we came to the preposterous state of affairs prevailing today, wherein we place the destiny of our nation, our planet, and our race in the hands of a mass of voters whose powers of judgment are manifested in such things as the type of television entertainment their preferences have pushed into prime time and the type of men they have elected to public office. And there is the equally weighty question of how, knowing the ease with which this mass is misled, we permitted virtually all of the media of mass information and entertainment to fall into the hands of a race whose interests are so diametrically opposed to our own. Perhaps even more pertinent to a consideration of human greatness, however, is the question of how our system of values came to be turned on its head, so that Franklin Roosevelt is regarded as a hero and Adolf Hitler as a villain, not only by the stolid and stunned masses, but also by a majority of the supposedly "educated" elite, many of whom pride themselves on their intellectual independence. Whether we judge the greatness of a man by his intrinsic qualities of character and soul or by his accomplishments, Adolf Hitler had greatness of a very high order -- if we use the standards which have been traditional in our race. We cannot, of course, make comparisons with all the "mute, inglorious Miltons" whose lack of notable accomplishment has made them anonymous, despite the sterling inner qualities they may have possessed. But when Hitler's character is held up beside those of other 20th-century political leaders, he stands as a giant among pygmies. At the prosaic level, we can note his ascetic personal habits, compared with Winston Churchill's habitual drunkenness and noto-rious self-indulgence; or his personal loyalty to those who had been his comrades in the days of political struggle, compared with Joseph Stalin's habit of murdering his former comrades by the dozen, as potential rivals, as soon as he no longer needed their services; or his direct, frank, and straightforward manner, compared to the cunning deviousness which was Franklin Roosevelt's trademark. At the spiritual level, the inner differences between Hitler and his contemporaries are even more striking. Hitler was a man with a mission, from the beginning. The testimony of his closest associates, from his boyhood days to the end of his life, agrees with the observations of more distant and impartial observers: Hitler had a mystical sense of destiny, a sense of having been singled out and called by a higher power to devote his life to the service of his race. His childhood companion August Kubizek has related extraordinary evidence of this when Hitler was only 16 years old.<August Kubizek, Adolf Hitler, mein Jugendfreund (Graz, 1953), pp. 127-135> Twenty years later, while he was in prison after an unsuccessful attempt to overthrow the government, Hitler himself wrote of his motivation in a way which suggested the range of his vision: "What we must fight for is the security of the existence and reproduction of our race and our people, the sustenance of our children and the maintenance of the purity of our blood . . . so that our people may mature for the fulfillment of the mission allotted them by the Creator of the universe. Every thought and every idea, every doctrine and all knowledge, must serve this purpose. And everything must be examined from this point of view and used or rejected according to its utility. Then no theory will stiffen into a dead doctrine, since it is life alone that all things must serve. . . . . . . [T]he National Socialist philosophy finds the importance of mankind in its basic racial elements. In the state it sees on principle a means to an end and construes that end as the preservation of the racial existence of man. . . . And so the National Socialist philosophy of life corresponds to the innermost will of Nature, since it restores that free play of forces which must lead to a continuous mutual higher breeding, until finally the best of humanity, having achieved possession of this earth, will have a free play for activity in domains which will lie partly above it and partly outside it. We all sense that in the distant future humanity must be faced by problems which only a highest race, become mas-ter people and supported by the means and possibilities of an entire globe, will be equipped to overcome. . . . Thus, the highest purpose of a National Socialist state is concern for the preservation of those original racial elements which bestow culture and create the beauty and dignity of a higher mankind. We, as Aryans, can conceive of the state only as the living organism of a nationality which not only assures the preservation of this nationality, but by the development of its spiritual and ideal abilities leads it to the highest freedom. . . . A National Socialist state must begin by raising marriage from the level of a continuous defilement of the race and give it the consecration of an institution which is called upon to produce images of the Lord and not monstrosities halfway between man and ape. . . . It must set race in the center of all life. It must take care to keep it pure. It must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. It must see to it that only the healthy beget children . . . . The National Socialist state must make certain that by a suitable education of youth it will someday obtain a race ripe for the last and greatest decisions on this earth. . . . . . .[A]nyone who wants to cure this era, which is inwardly sick and rotten, must first summon the courage to make clear the causes of this disease. And this should be the concern of the National Socialist movement: pushing aside all narrowmindedness, to gather and to organize from the ranks of our nation those forces capable of becoming the vanguard fighters for a new philosophy of life. . . . We are not simple enough to believe that it could ever be possible to bring about a perfect era. But this relieves no one of the obligation to combat recognized errors, to overcome weaknesses, and to strive for the ideal. Harsh reality of its own accord will create only too many limitations. For that very reason, however, man must try to serve the ultimate goal, and failures must not deter him, any more than he can abandon a system of justice because mistakes creep into it, or any more than medicine is discarded because there always will be sickness in spite of it. We National Socialists know that with this conception we stand as revolu-tionaries in the world of today and are branded as such. But our thoughts and actions must in no way be determined by the approval or disapproval of our time, but by the binding obligation to a truth which we have recognized."<Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf> Hitler's opponents, Churchill and Roosevelt, were party politicians, with the minds and souls of party politicians. Great, impersonal goals, just as truth, meant nothing at all to them. The only thing that counted was the approval or disapproval of their times: the outcome of the next election, a good press claque, votes. Only Stalin shared in any way Hitler's disdain for approval; only Stalin was motivated to any degree by an impersonal idea. But the idea that Stalin served was the alien, destructive idea of Jewish Marxism. And while Hitler served the Life Force with the instincts of a seer, Stalin served Marxism with the instincts of a bureaucrat and a butcher. A comparison of careers leads us to a similar ranking of greatness of soul. Churchill and Roosevelt were born into the political establishment. They fed at the public trough for years, in one office after another, grabbing greedily at opportunities for a bigger serving of swill. But it was circumstance, not their own efforts, which thrust them onto the stage of world history. Stalin hacked out his own niche in history to a much greater extent than his western allies, and he was an incomparably stronger man than either of them. He was tough, ruthless, infinitely cunning, and utterly determined to prevail, no matter what the obstacles. Even so, his struggle for prominence and power was entirely within the Bolshevik party and its predecessors. He was the consummate bureaucratic infighter, not the innovator or the lone pioneer. Only Adolf Hitler started literally from nothing and through the exercise of a superhuman will created the physical basis for the realization of his vision. In 1918, recovering from a British poison-gas attack in a veterans' hospital, he made the decision to enter politics in order to serve that vision. He was a 29-year-old invalid, with no money, no family, no friends or connections, no university education, and no experience. Liberals, Jews, and communists ruled his country, making him and all those to whom he might appeal for support outsiders. Five and one-half years later he was sentenced to five years in prison for his political activity, and his enemies thought that was the end of him and his movement. But less than nine years after being sentenced he was Chancellor of Germany, with the strongest and most progressive nation in Europe at his command. He had built the National Socialist movement and led it to victory over the organized opposition of the entire Establishment: conservatives, liberals, communists, Jews, and Christians. He then transformed Germany, lifting it out of its economic depression (while Americans, under Roosevelt, continued to line up at the soup kitchens), restoring its spirit (and much of the territory which had been taken from it by the victors of the First World War), stimulating its artistic and scientific creativity, and winning the admiration (or, in some cases, the envy and hatred) of other nations. It was an achievement hardly paralleled in the history of the world. Even those who do not understand the real significance of his creation must concede that. And what was the real significance of Hitler's work? One of his most earnest admirers in India, Savitri Devi, has given us a poetic answer to that question. She wrote: ". . . [I]n its essence, the National Socialist idea exceeds not only Germany and our times, but the Aryan race and mankind itself and any epoch; . . . it ultimately expresses that mysterious and unfailing wisdom according to which Nature lives and creates: the impersonal wisdom of the primeval forest and of the ocean depth and of the spheres in the dark fields of space; and .. . it is Adolf Hitler's glory not merely to have gone back to that divine wisdom -- stigmatizing man's silly infatuation for "intellect," his childish pride in "progress," and his criminal attempt to enslave Nature -- but to have made it the basis of a practical regeneration policy of worldwide scope, precisely now, in our overcrowded, overcivilized, and technically overevolved world, at the very end of the dark age."<Savitri Devi, The Lightning and the Sun (National Socialist World No. 1, p. 61)> More prosaically, Hitler's work, in contrast to that of his contemporaries, was above politics, above economics, above nationalism. He had mobilized a powerful, modern state and placed it at the service of our race, so that our race might become fit to serve as an agent of the Life Force. Perceptive and idealistic young men from every nation in Europe -- and from many nations outside Europe as well -- recognized this significance, and they flocked to serve him and to fight for his cause, even at the cost of censure and ostracism from their more parochial and narrowminded countrymen. There was never before an elite fighting force to match the SS, which by the end of the Second World War had more non-Germans than Germans in it. The war, of course, is counted as Hitler's great failure, even as the proof of his lack of greatness, by his detractors. It merely proves that he was a man, not a god, even if a divine will worked through him, and that he could not perform miracles. He could not defend himself forever, with the governments of nearly the whole world allied in a total war to pull him down and destroy his creation, so that they and the interests they served could return to "business as usual." Even so, he gave a far better account of himself than any of his adversaries. And what will count in the long run in determining Adolf Hitler's stature is not whether he lost or won the war, but whether it was he or his adversaries who were on the side of the Life Force, whether it was he or they who served the cause of Truth and human progress. We only have to look around us today to know it was not they. The measure of greatness NATIONAL VANGUARD Editorial from 1989 April 20 of this year is the 100th anniversary of the birth of the greatest man of our era -- a man who dared more and achieved more, who set his aim higher and climbed higher, who felt more deeply and stirred the souls of those around him more mightily, who was more closely attuned to the Life Force which permeates our cosmos and gives it meaning and purpose, and did more to serve that Life Force, than any other man of our times. And yet he is the most reviled and hated man of our times. Only a few tens of thousands of men and women, in scattered groups around the world, will celebrate his birthday with love and reverence on April 20, while all of the scribblers and commentators of the controlled news media, the controlled politicians, and the controlled churchmen will pour out their hatred and venom and lies against him, and those lies will be believed by hundreds of millions. What is the measure of greatness in a man? Only the most vulgar and doctrinaire democrat would seriously equate greatness with popularity -- although in any polling of average citizens on their choice for the greatest man of the century there are certain to be substantial numbers of votes for Elvis Presley, John Kennedy, Billy Graham, Michael Jackson, and various other high-visibility lightweights: charismatic entertainers on the stage of politics, rock concerts, spectator sports, or what have you. More serious citizens would pass by the lightweights and choose men who have changed the world in some way. We would hear choices like Franklin Roosevelt ("he saved the world from fascism"), Albert Einstein ("he taught us about the nature of our universe"), and Martin Luther King ("he helped us achieve racial justice"), depending upon whether one's personal inclinations lay more in the direction of politics, science, or racial self-abasement, respectively. But if the poll asked instead for the most evil man of the century, or the most hated man, or the man having the most negative influence, at least three-quarters of the blue-collar and the white-collar pollees alike would name one man: Adolf Hitler. This, however, would be merely a reflection of the role assigned to him by the controlled mass media, rather than a truly informed and reasoned choice. All of this raises several very interesting issues. There is, for example, the question of how we came to the preposterous state of affairs prevailing today, wherein we place the destiny of our nation, our planet, and our race in the hands of a mass of voters whose powers of judgment are manifested in such things as the type of television entertainment their preferences have pushed into prime time and the type of men they have elected to public office. And there is the equally weighty question of how, knowing the ease with which this mass is misled, we permitted virtually all of the media of mass information and entertainment to fall into the hands of a race whose interests are so diametrically opposed to our own. Perhaps even more pertinent to a consideration of human greatness, however, is the question of how our system of values came to be turned on its head, so that Franklin Roosevelt is regarded as a hero and Adolf Hitler as a villain, not only by the stolid and stunned masses, but also by a majority of the supposedly "educated" elite, many of whom pride themselves on their intellectual independence. Whether we judge the greatness of a man by his intrinsic qualities of character and soul or by his accomplishments, Adolf Hitler had greatness of a very high order -- if we use the standards which have been traditional in our race. We cannot, of course, make comparisons with all the "mute, inglorious Miltons" whose lack of notable accomplishment has made them anonymous, despite the sterling inner qualities they may have possessed. But when Hitler's character is held up beside those of other 20th-century political leaders, he stands as a giant among pygmies. At the prosaic level, we can note his ascetic personal habits, compared with Winston Churchill's habitual drunkenness and noto-rious self-indulgence; or his personal loyalty to those who had been his comrades in the days of political struggle, compared with Joseph Stalin's habit of murdering his former comrades by the dozen, as potential rivals, as soon as he no longer needed their services; or his direct, frank, and straightforward manner, compared to the cunning deviousness which was Franklin Roosevelt's trademark. At the spiritual level, the inner differences between Hitler and his contemporaries are even more striking. Hitler was a man with a mission, from the beginning. The testimony of his closest associates, from his boyhood days to the end of his life, agrees with the observations of more distant and impartial observers: Hitler had a mystical sense of destiny, a sense of having been singled out and called by a higher power to devote his life to the service of his race. His childhood companion August Kubizek has related extraordinary evidence of this when Hitler was only 16 years old.<August Kubizek, Adolf Hitler, mein Jugendfreund (Graz, 1953), pp. 127-135> Twenty years later, while he was in prison after an unsuccessful attempt to overthrow the government, Hitler himself wrote of his motivation in a way which suggested the range of his vision: "What we must fight for is the security of the existence and reproduction of our race and our people, the sustenance of our children and the maintenance of the purity of our blood . . . so that our people may mature for the fulfillment of the mission allotted them by the Creator of the universe. Every thought and every idea, every doctrine and all knowledge, must serve this purpose. And everything must be examined from this point of view and used or rejected according to its utility. Then no theory will stiffen into a dead doctrine, since it is life alone that all things must serve. . . . . . . [T]he National Socialist philosophy finds the importance of mankind in its basic racial elements. In the state it sees on principle a means to an end and construes that end as the preservation of the racial existence of man. . . . And so the National Socialist philosophy of life corresponds to the innermost will of Nature, since it restores that free play of forces which must lead to a continuous mutual higher breeding, until finally the best of humanity, having achieved possession of this earth, will have a free play for activity in domains which will lie partly above it and partly outside it. We all sense that in the distant future humanity must be faced by problems which only a highest race, become mas-ter people and supported by the means and possibilities of an entire globe, will be equipped to overcome. . . . Thus, the highest purpose of a National Socialist state is concern for the preservation of those original racial elements which bestow culture and create the beauty and dignity of a higher mankind. We, as Aryans, can conceive of the state only as the living organism of a nationality which not only assures the preservation of this nationality, but by the development of its spiritual and ideal abilities leads it to the highest freedom. . . . A National Socialist state must begin by raising marriage from the level of a continuous defilement of the race and give it the consecration of an institution which is called upon to produce images of the Lord and not monstrosities halfway between man and ape. . . . It must set race in the center of all life. It must take care to keep it pure. It must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. It must see to it that only the healthy beget children . . . . The National Socialist state must make certain that by a suitable education of youth it will someday obtain a race ripe for the last and greatest decisions on this earth. . . . . . .[A]nyone who wants to cure this era, which is inwardly sick and rotten, must first summon the courage to make clear the causes of this disease. And this should be the concern of the National Socialist movement: pushing aside all narrowmindedness, to gather and to organize from the ranks of our nation those forces capable of becoming the vanguard fighters for a new philosophy of life. . . . We are not simple enough to believe that it could ever be possible to bring about a perfect era. But this relieves no one of the obligation to combat recognized errors, to overcome weaknesses, and to strive for the ideal. Harsh reality of its own accord will create only too many limitations. For that very reason, however, man must try to serve the ultimate goal, and failures must not deter him, any more than he can abandon a system of justice because mistakes creep into it, or any more than medicine is discarded because there always will be sickness in spite of it. We National Socialists know that with this conception we stand as revolu-tionaries in the world of today and are branded as such. But our thoughts and actions must in no way be determined by the approval or disapproval of our time, but by the binding obligation to a truth which we have recognized."<Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf> Hitler's opponents, Churchill and Roosevelt, were party politicians, with the minds and souls of party politicians. Great, impersonal goals, just as truth, meant nothing at all to them. The only thing that counted was the approval or disapproval of their times: the outcome of the next election, a good press claque, votes. Only Stalin shared in any way Hitler's disdain for approval; only Stalin was motivated to any degree by an impersonal idea. But the idea that Stalin served was the alien, destructive idea of Jewish Marxism. And while Hitler served the Life Force with the instincts of a seer, Stalin served Marxism with the instincts of a bureaucrat and a butcher. A comparison of careers leads us to a similar ranking of greatness of soul. Churchill and Roosevelt were born into the political establishment. They fed at the public trough for years, in one office after another, grabbing greedily at opportunities for a bigger serving of swill. But it was circumstance, not their own efforts, which thrust them onto the stage of world history. Stalin hacked out his own niche in history to a much greater extent than his western allies, and he was an incomparably stronger man than either of them. He was tough, ruthless, infinitely cunning, and utterly determined to prevail, no matter what the obstacles. Even so, his struggle for prominence and power was entirely within the Bolshevik party and its predecessors. He was the consummate bureaucratic infighter, not the innovator or the lone pioneer. Only Adolf Hitler started literally from nothing and through the exercise of a superhuman will created the physical basis for the realization of his vision. In 1918, recovering from a British poison-gas attack in a veterans' hospital, he made the decision to enter politics in order to serve that vision. He was a 29-year-old invalid, with no money, no family, no friends or connections, no university education, and no experience. Liberals, Jews, and communists ruled his country, making him and all those to whom he might appeal for support outsiders. Five and one-half years later he was sentenced to five years in prison for his political activity, and his enemies thought that was the end of him and his movement. But less than nine years after being sentenced he was Chancellor of Germany, with the strongest and most progressive nation in Europe at his command. He had built the National Socialist movement and led it to victory over the organized opposition of the entire Establishment: conservatives, liberals, communists, Jews, and Christians. He then transformed Germany, lifting it out of its economic depression (while Americans, under Roosevelt, continued to line up at the soup kitchens), restoring its spirit (and much of the territory which had been taken from it by the victors of the First World War), stimulating its artistic and scientific creativity, and winning the admiration (or, in some cases, the envy and hatred) of other nations. It was an achievement hardly paralleled in the history of the world. Even those who do not understand the real significance of his creation must concede that. And what was the real significance of Hitler's work? One of his most earnest admirers in India, Savitri Devi, has given us a poetic answer to that question. She wrote: ". . . [I]n its essence, the National Socialist idea exceeds not only Germany and our times, but the Aryan race and mankind itself and any epoch; . . . it ultimately expresses that mysterious and unfailing wisdom according to which Nature lives and creates: the impersonal wisdom of the primeval forest and of the ocean depth and of the spheres in the dark fields of space; and .. . it is Adolf Hitler's glory not merely to have gone back to that divine wisdom -- stigmatizing man's silly infatuation for "intellect," his childish pride in "progress," and his criminal attempt to enslave Nature -- but to have made it the basis of a practical regeneration policy of worldwide scope, precisely now, in our overcrowded, overcivilized, and technically overevolved world, at the very end of the dark age."<Savitri Devi, The Lightning and the Sun (National Socialist World No. 1, p. 61)> More prosaically, Hitler's work, in contrast to that of his contemporaries, was above politics, above economics, above nationalism. He had mobilized a powerful, modern state and placed it at the service of our race, so that our race might become fit to serve as an agent of the Life Force. Perceptive and idealistic young men from every nation in Europe -- and from many nations outside Europe as well -- recognized this significance, and they flocked to serve him and to fight for his cause, even at the cost of censure and ostracism from their more parochial and narrowminded countrymen. There was never before an elite fighting force to match the SS, which by the end of the Second World War had more non-Germans than Germans in it. The war, of course, is counted as Hitler's great failure, even as the proof of his lack of greatness, by his detractors. It merely proves that he was a man, not a god, even if a divine will worked through him, and that he could not perform miracles. He could not defend himself forever, with the governments of nearly the whole world allied in a total war to pull him down and destroy his creation, so that they and the interests they served could return to "business as usual." Even so, he gave a far better account of himself than any of his adversaries. And what will count in the long run in determining Adolf Hitler's stature is not whether he lost or won the war, but whether it was he or his adversaries who were on the side of the Life Force, whether it was he or they who served the cause of Truth and human progress. We only have to look around us today to know it was not they.
Christian Identity politics By James Ridgeway For more than a decade, federal lawmen have sternly advised all visitors not to go near the place. When US marshals tried to fly surveillance missions across the nearby hills, the pilot suddenly pulled away when he saw what he thought were muzzle flashes from the ground. Rumors hold that everyone who lives there, down to the smallest child, is trained and armed; that great underground bunkers hold vast stores of munitions, even chemical and biological weapons. It is a place that federal informants seek to infiltrate, and for which federal agents have laid out secret contingency plans for a Waco-type siege. And it is a place where everyone knows that to appear uninvited risks being shot on sight. The place is Elohim City, an isolated religious community in the Ozark Mountains of eastern Oklahoma. Led by a bearded former Canadian Mennonite preacher named Robert Millar, it is home to seventy-five men, women, and children who are true believers in th e religious doctrine known as Christian Identity. Clearly, this is a religious community with a difference. Its members believe that government is the enemy, that America's secular, multicultural society is a present-day Gomorrah, and that Elohim City is a bunker in a great battle between the children of darkness (the Jews) and the children of light (the Aryan race). Elohim City became the subject of scrutiny in the last year when telephone records revealed that Timothy McVeigh made calls to the rural enclave in the weeks prior to the bombing of the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City. But McVeigh's mysterious phone call s are just one of a host of links that connect the increasingly violent activists of the racist far right to the doctrine which helps to inspire them. Christian Identity, which elevates white supremacy and separatism to a Godly ideal, is the ideological f uel that fires much of the activity of the racist far right. By reinterpreting the biblical story of creation, practitioners of Christian Identity believe they have discovered a cosmic justification for modern-day racism. According to this reinterpretation, the origins of the Asian and African races lie in biblical "beasts of the fields" � beings of an order lower than humans, whose existence predates God's creation of Adam "in his own image." Adam was not the first man, but the first white man. As the Christian Identity version of the Creation story unfolds, the s erpent, disguised as a white man, gets into the Garden of Eden and seduces Eve, who bears the devil � a son in the form of Cain. That's how the Jews get into the picture. Demonizing Jews has a lengthy history in Western culture, but for contemporary racis ts, Christian Identity provides the ultimate proof that Jews are indeed the "spawn of Satan." Their evidence is even more convincing than the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the faked 19th-century document which purported to be proof of a worldwide Jewis h conspiracy. Identity followers draw their antisemitism and racism from the Bible. Although the connections are seldom made by the media, Christian Identity provides the ideological backbone of such groups as the Aryan Nations, which seeks to claim the western mountains as a white homeland; the Midwestern Posse Comitatus, a militant un derground which believes that the local sheriff is the highest legitimate elected official in the land; and Freemen groups like the one that held law enforcement authorities at bay in Montana in 1996. On a more practical level, Christian Identity enclaves provide a trail of safe havens for movement activists, stretching from Hayden Lake in northern Idaho to Elohim City on the Oklahoma/Arkansas border. When Posse leader Gordon Kahl � eventually killed i n a shootout with federal marshals in 1983 � was on the run, he found shelter with Christian Identity followers in Arkansas. When the FBI was closing in on the Order gang, which had robbed banks and murdered Denver talk show host Alan Berg in the mid-1980 s, its members sought refuge in Bull Shoals Lake, Arkansas, encampment of the Covenant, Sword & Arm of the Lord, a Christian Identity religious community. And 1996 court documents indicate that members of the Aryan Republic Army, a Midwest gang of bank ro bbers who vowed to use their loot to finance a white revolution, had ties to Elohim City. Given the extraordinary prominence of Christian Identity in defining racial ideology and its plitical expression on the far right, it is astounding how little serious attention has been paid to the subject by mainstream Christian denominations. It is, aft er all, the most deeply held beliefs of Christian theologians and clergy � and the doctrines of their religious orders � that have been seized and twisted by Christian Identity practitioners to justify their very "un-Christian" acts. And these religious l eaders have both the moral authority and � by virtue of their familiarity with the Bible and with Christian doctrine � the expertise needed to fight back. Yet with few exceptions, the mainstream denominations have remained curiously silent in the face of these modern-day crusades. "I think one of the reasons is a great many clergy and others who would be equipped to deal with the theology don't really know much about it," says Michael Barkun, whose 1994 book Religion and the Racist Right explores the history and cultur e of Christian Identity. "They have some sense these are renegade groups that often espouse a white supremacist doctrine, but I think they are unfamiliar with the theology in many cases and not equipped to take it on. And even when they are equipped and k now something about it, I think there is a tendency to regard it not as worthy of attention because it's repugnant or because the numbers of people involved are small and because the groups lack much in the way of public visibility." Theologians who could confront it, says Barkun, "may feel that by doing so that would dignify it and give it a stature they don't wish to have." In his research Barkun ran across just one graduate student at a seminary studying Christian Identity. When he talks about his book to religious groups, Barkun says, "It's as if they are hearing it for the first time. ...It strikes them that it is so unim aginably distant from the intellectual universe that they inhabit, I might as well be talking about a subject from another planet." Finley Schaife, minister of the progressive Park Slope Methodist Church in Brooklyn, believes that the mainstream churches do not take the Christian racists seriously because "They don't have power in the mainline church. Nobody pays attention to the powe rless. That's why they are blowing up things." Jim Wallis, the evangelist who heads the progressive evangelical Sojourners and edits its magazine, says he thinks church leaders are "afraid to take them [the Christian racists] on. There are some class issues here. A lot of them are young, white working class kids. The Methodists launched a project to try and minister to some of these folks, trying not to say, 'We are National Council of Churches liberals who are offended by you stupid people,' but to say, 'What's going on here? What's behind this kind of anger and fear.'" Christian Identity may actually owe part of its success to the fact that it confronts issues that haunt the lives of its followers, but that the mainstream churches are reluctant to "take on." As Kerry Noble, the former leader of the Covenant, Sword & Arm of the Lord, explains it, members of his group, coming from pentecostal Baptist circles, were drawn into Christian Identity precisely because the "traditional churches never tried to answer racial questions. When we were growing up if we asked questions about race nobody wanted to answer...In th e traditional churches they were uncomfortable talking about it...In Identity these were people who weren't afraid to talk about race." The less fundamentalist denominations may also have weakened their ability to refute the Bible-based lore spread by Christian Identity because they have themselves strayed far from the practice of biblical study and interpretation. "I think on the whole, theological liberals have not bothered with the Bible," says Walter Bruggemann, of Columbia Theological Seminar in Decatur, Georgia, "I think what has to happen we have to out-Bible those people. And by and large liberals have not paid enough attention to be able to do that." The ministers I spoke with did say there was nothing in the Bible to support the notion of "pre-Adamic" man or Christian Identity's dream image of the Lost Tribes of Israel worming their way through northern Europe and over to America. They believe the Ch ristian Identity reading of the Creation story gets the allegories all wrong. But none of them much wanted to discuss the details. One of the few spirited responses came from Eugene F. Rivers 3d, an evangelical minister of progressive stripe in Dorchester , Massachusetts. Rivers points out that some current thinking places the origins of human life in Africa near Tanzania. "If Adam is made in the image of God and if Adam began in Tanzania," Rivers said, "you white boys have got a problem because that means you are the children of niggers." Some church bureaucrats believe it is unfair to criticize their inaction, because they have made efforts to combat Christian Identity doctrine. For example, in 1986 the National Council of Churches of Christ published a pamphlet by Leonard Zeskind called "The Christian Identity Movement: Analyzing Its Theological Rationalization for Racist and Anti-Semitic Violence." Some members of the clergy have initiated more direct actions, but found little interest among their colleagues. Last year William Wassmuth, a former Catholic priest who heads the Northwest Coalition Against Malicious Harassment and whose rectory was blow n up by the Order gang in 1986, sought to pull together church leaders across the Northwest for a two-day meeting. "We advertised it and worked it every way we knew how and finally canceled it because we just couldn't get anybody to go," he recalled recen tly. "They [church leaders] say they're interested but they just never end up committing to it. Our feeling is that there is some kind of agenda that is not being spoken. Our best guess is they are nervous about criticizing anything that calls itself Chri stian. And secondly they are nervous about raising this whole spectrum because everybody is anxious to do everything they possibly can to keep from providing anyone an excuse not to come to their church. So they play patty-cake with it." The mainstream churches also shy away from taking on the far-right Christian Identity groups because their racist brand of Christianity has become entangled with other political agendas � such as the resistance against taxes, overreaching federal governme nt control, liberal environmentalists, abortion rights, and gay rights � which are popular among their parishioners. The Northwest Coalition, for example, goes after the far right for its antigay attacks. That makes the already hesitant churches back off. "We run across it all the time," Wassmuth says. "In one degree or another. Nobody will say the racists are all right because they are pounding on gay folks, but on the other hand they won't take as strong a stand against them either as soon as those of u s who are taking a strong stand against them also bring up the gay issue." In Idaho, America's Promise ministries, a Christian Identity group, attempts to widen its base by appealing not just to white power Christians, but to people who don't like gays, and people who are opposed to abortion. Individuals associated with America' s Promise have been charged with a plot to bomb both a newspaper and a Planned Parenthood clinic in Spokane and to rob a bank there. "That's their thrust these days," Wassmuth adds, "To find these kinds of issues that are on people's minds and use those issues to get people together and then they weave their conspiracy theories that takes it way down to the next level, which is their l evel of Christian Patriot conspiracy, anti-government...It's a hook, to get people in front of them." A few other small groups of Christian clergy say they are trying to fight Christian Identity on theological grounds. Preachers in Montana, organized around the state's Association of Churches, have talked with the Freemen, and Jerry Walters, a Lutheran pa stor in Round Up, Montana, meets with the Freemen in jail and in their homes to try and convince them their understanding of the gospel is wrong. The Montana Association of Churches last year also put out a theologic statement of principle in an attempt t o combat Christian Identity. In Chicago, Dave Ostendorf, a United Church of Christ minister who fought the Posse Comitatus as head of PriarieFire during the 1980s, now goes from one community to another, aiming to teach Christian ministers about Identity. After the Oklahoma City bom bing, the Methodist church organized various local meetings, and Dale Fooshee, a lay Methodist in Kansas runs a training program among the church's Rural Chaplains Association around the Midwest. But Fooshee reports that the going can be slow. In Abilene the mainstream churches resist taking on Christian Identity because families of Identity members balk. And followers of the more conservative churches are leery of going after Identity. "It's a sl ippery slope theologically," Fooshee says, "because you've got people who are really conservative who have got views on the Bible. They aren't necessarily violent. They're just conservative." Still, this can be fertile ground for Christian Identity ideas. "Some of the conservative folks," says Fooshee, "are still battling it out over what the Jews did to Jesus." Identity followers believe the crucifixion of Jesus was part of Satan's elaborate scheme to get back at God through the demonic Jews. Not surprisingly, Jewish organizations � the Anti-Defamation League and American Jewish Committee, in particular � have been at the forefront of the counterattack against far-right racist religious groups. They are carrying out ongoing research, publishin g numerous books and pamphlets, and encouraging media attention on far-right activism. But perhaps the most powerful message against Christian Identity them comes from Kerry Noble, the former leader of the Covenant, Sword & Arm of the Lord, the Christian community which was a centerpiece of the revolutionary far right in the 1980s and set o ut to murder a judge and an FBI agent in retaliation for the government's crack-down on the far-right underground. It was this group which first plotted a bombing of the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City during the early 1980s � in the name of Christ.
White Power: We've Got It! Is "White Power" really the answer to the survival of our race? by Jost Turner "You can buy a White man for a compliment, let alone $60,000 a year!" These words describe the frustration and disgust of an educator in the public school system after years of watching the predominantly White administrators and teachers unquestioningly affirm, expand, and implement with religious fanaticism, every new dictum of political correctness - the new State Religion -which slithers down from the educational hierarchy - regardless of logic or consequence! This is White Power in action. The words White Power adorn reams of White racialist literature, posters, and stickers. They embellish telephone messages, tattoos, and quasi National Socialist salutes. White Power is a universal demand of much of the White racial movement, and it is looked upon with great longing as the final savior of a world gone mad. But the joke's on us, because White Power is exactly what we have today, and what we have had every day that this world has been going mad. It is time we faced some cold, hard facts. Most any Jewish activist will happily point out that Bill Clinton is just about as White as they come, as has been every other president before him.. At no time in the history of this country has the vast majority of the Senate or House of Representatives been anything other than lily White. The Supreme Court has always been predominantly White, as are government police agencies such as the FBI. The Federal Bureaucracy is still largely White, and all no-Whites therein have been given their jobs by the White Federal hierarchy. State governments are White, as are most municipal and county governments. The courts on all levels are still predominantly White. A clear majority of the voters in this county are White, and the majority of the tax-payers are White. A majority of corporation CEOs and board members are White, and there are even enough Whites in positions of power throughout the media to counter Jewish influence. Finally, there are more wealthy Whites than Jews or other ethnic groups. All of our enemies would point out that this nothing more nor less than White Power! The fact is that there are more than enough White voters, Whites in positions of governmental and police power, and White financial muscle to ship out every single Jew, Negro Asian, Latino , and other non-White on the next boat! But instead, every one of these elements of White Power encourage the immigration of still more non-Whites in the country and disenfranchise their own White brethren-either by direct power (government, police and financial) or seeming indifference (voters). The situation we have today is a direct consequence of 200+ years of White Power. How the Jews and non-Whites must howl with laughter when they hear us shout "White Power". You want it? You got it! At the rate that White Power is exuberantly staffing the government, courts, bureaucracies, and police with non-Whites, it won't be long before we see an end to White Power. Perhaps this will be for the better. Perhaps then a few more Whites will begin to reconsider their position. We definitely have White Power, but why does it serve only to destroy us? The answer was pointed out by Adolf Hitler: "As soon as egoism become the ruler of a Folk, the bands of order are loosened, and in the chase after their own happiness men fall from heaven into a real hell." Egoism is self-absorption. Today, most White are very self-absorbed, not only with financial accumulation, but even more with societal position or image. In this state of egoism, they can be easily manipulated and controlled by simple compliments or ego-strokes to their position, authority, identity, status, education, or intelligence. It's that simple, and it works! This, not to mention a salary in the five or six figure bracket, is how university administrators, instructors, and students are so easily manipulated into ratifying, embracing and further preaching virtually every nonsensical decree of political correctness as a new State Religion!. They go on to initiate the doctrines of this State Religion not all the different governmental, judicial, corporate, media and educational positions of power to which they gravitate. That's White Power. The working class is just as susceptible. They are self-absorbed with their own status and intelligence, and, responding to ego-stimulation by television and motion picture media personalities, they too feel the gratification of the politically correct thinking of the new State Religion - not to mention social security, health insurance and retirement! That's White Power. The great majority of Whites are far too self absorbed to consider the effect of all this political correctness on the future of their children. Most are far too self-absorbed to worry about the welfare of their children, let alone their Folk or arena are being denigrated by self-styled racial writers and leaders who have never made any comparable contributions to the struggle. This, too, is White Power. Egoism in the White racial movement is not confined to the leadership. Virtually overnight, a handful of "Hollywood Nazis" destroyed years of careful, successful work which we had done to demolish media distortions and show the residents of a small California county the nature of true National Socialists. Almost as soon as they arrived, these "neo-nazis" wiped out everything we had accomplished with pointless flag burnings, intimidations, threats, violence (against Aryan women!), and, of course, parading around in their childish "White Power" tee shirts. These media-scripted, un-Aryan "neo-Nazi" activities were not even aimed at non-Whites, Jews, or left-wing activists. There are few non-whites in that county, and none in the affected town. These childish antics were all directed at Whites, most of whom had no interests at all in urban racial problems. Any observer could see that everything done was to gratify fragile egos. Now, a whole county will never again be receptive to any message of National Socialism. That's White Power. If we are to survive as an Aryan Folk and as a White race, a sizeable portion of us must follow the guidelines of Adolf Hitler and get beyond egoism. We must banish our self-absorption, and put all or our own personal desires, interest, and welfare of our Folk and race. This is not "White Power". This is National Socialism! This "revolution in thought", the higher idealism of Folk-consciousness, is what created the great social and economic miracles of National Socialist Germany. To survive, we must begin right now to build a solid foundation of Folk-consciousness, first within our own lives, then educating others who are already racially aware, and finally offering it to those who become disillusioned by self-aggrandizement and egoism. We should replace that inappropriate, embarrassing slogan of "White Power" with one word which carries the connotations of a new consciousness and a new age: Folk!
The organizational strategy Here we are, losing battle after battle while we hope desperately that we will in the end, somehow, be able to win the war, if we can just do the right things. What are the right things for us to do? Well, we must understand where we are, where we have been, and where we want to go; we must formulate that understanding into as clear and cogent a message as possible and adapt the message to every feasible medium; and we must then propagate the message effectively enough to reach every person to whom it is relevant. These are the things being done now by the National Alliance and a few other -- pitifully few -- individuals and groups. These are absolutely necessary things, and if we were dealing with rational individuals, they would be sufficient for our purpose. The great majority of our people are not rational, however, nor do they function primarily as individuals, and so more is required than merely reaching them with our message. Most people function much more as members of groups or as elements in a social milieu than they do as individuals, and we must deal with them in this group or organizational context in order to be effective on a large scale. For the sake of concreteness: There are history professors who are quite capable of understanding our message -- through their own studies they have learned all the facts we have learned and are quite bright enough to interpret them correctly -- but they operate within a milieu which makes understanding dangerous and frightening to them. If they want to publish papers and advance their careers, they must conform their theses and their conclusions to the prejudices of their peers who edit the professional journals. If they want to be secure in their employment, they must conform what they teach in their classes to what their department heads and their deans consider Politically Correct. And if they want to keep their wives happy and be invited to the faculty parties, they must be careful what they say even in private to their closest friends, lest they violate the Great Taboo. A few of the more courageous and independent-minded professors may eschew the parties, keep Politically Incorrect books in their private libraries, and speak more or less freely with trusted intimates, but most will be so terrified of being unfashionable that they will censor even their own innermost thoughts. Likewise, there are intelligent and perceptive policemen who are exposed daily to the grimmest consequences of the government's racial, immigration, and welfare policies. Some of them are appalled by these policies and will go so far as to discuss the destructiveness of the government with their colleagues. Nearly all of them, however, will continue to enforce the government's laws for 40 hours each week. It is their job, and they need their paychecks. These social and organizational constraints are not new. They are inherent in our society, and to some degree in every society. Things may be a bit more highly organized and centralized today than they were 50 or 100 years ago, but the real difference is simply that the policies have changed: policy-making is much more in the hands of the fashion-setters today than it was in the past, and the latter are more Jewish. What this means is that disseminating our message to individuals can have only limited results. Only those individuals who are relatively rational and relatively free of organizational constraints will respond positively. How many of these are there in our society? It's difficult to be precise, but probably not more than two or three per cent of the White population are sufficiently free to examine our message rationally and then to act on their reason. It is essential to reach these people, of course. It also is essential to reach the great majority who are not capable of responding positively to any unfashionable message: it is essential to reach them and to saturate them with facts and ideas, even though we know that their only reaction at this time will be fear and hostility. As mentioned above, however, this is not enough. It is necessary to do more. It is necessary to address the organizational aspects of our war. In order to win, we must be able to manipulate at least some of the organizational constraints under which most people function. Which is the better strategy for changing the way history is taught: to attempt to persuade each of thousands of professors that he should try to find courage and respect for truth, neither of which he has previously manifested, and defy the policy-makers of his profession -- or to replace a few dozen policy-makers? Which is the better way for changing the government's police apparatus from a force for evil into a force for good: to attempt to make each policeman individually do that which is contrary to his nature by rebelling against his appointed superiors -- or to change the interests and loyalties of a relative handful of superiors? The answers depend on the details. If the history department heads, journal editors, and police chiefs are all Jews, and the rank-and-file professors and cops are mostly our people, then only the first approach has any merit. This is the case with most of the mass media, for example, where there is no chance at all of changing the interests of the fashion-setters. Fortunately, among professors and cops the people at the top are far more open to persuasion. Even where substantial headway can be made at the top of a group, however, it remains necessary to saturate those at the bottom with our message: if professors discover one fine morning that it has become permissible for them to sing a new tune in class, they must at least be familiar with the new lyrics. The degree of centralization of authority in a group is an important factor in the dynamics of change: the more highly centralized an organization, the greater the leverage which can be had by persuading a policy-maker -- but also the closer to the top one must get in order for the leverage to be effective. The Army is an example of a highly centralized organization, where in theory all policy comes from the commander in chief; in practice, however, a few highly placed command personnel working together may be able to cut the chain of command above themselves. The Army also is an example of an organization in which the only possibility for redirection lies at or near the top. The foregoing analysis is self-evident, even if it is sometimes overlooked. Less evident are the specific ways in which we should address the organizational aspects of our problem. How do we begin to gain effective organizational leverage while continuing to build the means for disseminating our basic message to the rank and file of our people everywhere? Let's look at a few general truths which should guide any organizational approach. First, any alternative presented to policy-makers must be self-evidently viable. Policy-makers are a bit more intelligent and substantially better endowed with self-discipline than the rank and file, but they are not notably more courageous or less superstitious. In fact, they are more often terrified by the thought of being unfashionable than are their organizational inferiors, because they have more to lose. This means that our alternative must be one which already has been pounded into their consciousness -- and the consciousness of the rank and file as well -- until they are sufficiently familiar with it that they can at least be persuaded that it could become the new fashion. When the New World Order policy of "free" trade was being hotly debated a few months ago -- debated even though it already had been declared de rigueur by the fashion-setters -- its vocal opponents in the Congress drew their courage from their knowledge that many of their constituents actively opposed the policy. Had there not been strong grass-roots opposition to NAFTA, based on the understanding by ordinary workers that it meant exporting their jobs to Mexico, the legislators would have found neither the courage nor the sense of responsibility to oppose it on their own. As it was, opposition to "free" trade seemed that it might be a viable alternative to the fashion insisted on by the New World Order crowd, even though the latter eventually prevailed. Second, anyone who wants policy-makers to switch brands must be prepared to offer compensation. Policy-makers are at least as selfish and materialistic as the masses. Any plan which counts on their being persuaded to take actions which are both unfashionable and self-sacrificing is certain to fail. Every lobbyist understands this. He does not try to persuade a legislator that a particular policy is right; he tries instead to show that it is in the legislator's personal interest to support the policy. Of course, it usually is money which talks in such matters. Many policy-makers have other than monetary interests, however. Some even have the foresight to understand that the policies they have been supporting will not continue to be tenable in the long run. Others are susceptible to being persuaded of this, especially as the disastrous effects of current policies become more manifest. In each case what is needed is a credible argument that a policy-maker, whether he be a university dean or a general in the Pentagon, can better his personal position in the long run by backing a new policy which happens to be unfashionable at the moment. Usually the current power structure has the advantage in handing out carrots to reward policy-makers for falling in line with current fashion. The recent effort by the Clintonistas to push "free" trade and the "assault rifle" ban through the Congress provided dozens of examples of the buying of policy switches with government money: a brother-in-law given a sinecure on a trade "advisory panel" in return for a "yes" vote on NAFTA; a promise of a contract to build 300 midnight basketball courts in a Congressman's district in return for backing the "crime" bill. The labor unions and the National Rifle Association just didn't have as many carrots. As the moral authority and prestige of the government continue to decline along with its organizational effectiveness, however, the government's carrots will lose some of their lustre and credibility. Bill Clinton is doing a great service for the American people in this regard. And as government prestige declines, so does the prestige of other organizations supporting the same policies. Third, the carrot should be accompanied by a credible stick. A policy-maker should be made to believe that the danger to himself in sticking with the old fashion is greater than the danger in switching to the new. Probably not too much should be said about this aspect of organizational work, except to note that as the power to reward grows, so does the power to punish. The above considerations, applied to formal organizational structures such as university administrations and armies, may seem more theoretical than practical at this time. About all that we can really do now, relevant to these general guidelines, is continue building the means to disseminate our message more widely and more effectively. What applies to formal structures in this regard also applies to informal structures, however, and some of them may be more accessible. An informal structure exists wherever there is a policy-maker or fashion-setter and a group of people who follow his policy or adopt his fashion: a popular but independent church minister and his congregation, a media idol or rock star and his or her fans, even a very successful and popular businessman/"society" leader in a community and his following of yuppies who also want to be rich and popular. All that is required is a bond between policy-maker and followers which is stronger than, or at least not much weaker than, that between the followers and other guides to belief and behavior in their lives. Whether one is dealing with a formal, highly centralized structure or a very loose and informal organization, the goal is leverage. Instead of focusing all of his efforts on persuading the rank and file to change their policies, the good strategist may direct a portion of his effort toward the established policy-makers. An excellent example of the application of this principle is provided by the Jews' neutralization of the mainline Christian churches after the Second World War. To be sure, the Christian churches hadn't been a real impediment to the Jews since the Spanish Inquisition went into retirement. Even before the war many Christian leaders were making a career out of playing up to the Jews, and members of the more primitive Protestant sects were practically worshipping them, as "God's Chosen People." Nevertheless, there were annoying clashes occasionally, as Christians reacted negatively to Jewish efforts to commercialize sex in films, or as some latter-day crusader railed against Jewish promotion of the White-slave trade. There were even cases of Christian leaders speaking out against Jewish subversion of American economic and political affairs: an example was Father Charles Coughlin, whose immensely popular radio broadcasts in the 1930s exposing the leading Jewish role in Communism were a major headache for Jews. Eventually the Roman Catholic hierarchy ordered Coughlin to hold his tongue, but it was not soon enough for the Jews, and they decided to eliminate the possibility of any more cannons breaking loose on Christian decks. The Jews did not accomplish this solely by attempting to persuade the Christian masses that Jews were above all criticism -- although their postwar "Holocaust" propaganda certainly helped in that regard. More to the point, they did not neutralize Christendom primarily by attacking Christian leaders or Christian doctrine, or by attempting to persuade individual Christians to abjure their religious beliefs. Instead the Jews directed their principal effort toward Christian policy-makers: pontiffs, theologians, leading radio evangelists, and the politician-buinessman-bureaucrat hybrids who had risen to the top of the various Protestant denominations. The Jews gave them propositions they couldn't refuse: in part because the Christian leadership already was morally debilitated to a large degree, in part because the carrots and sticks held out to them were impressive, and in part because the alternative fashion offered -- Jews can do no wrong and must never be criticized or held accountable -- already was implicit in much of what Christians accepted as holy writ. (In Deuteronomy 28, for example, one reads of the covenant between the Jews and their god: "The Lord thy God will set thee on high above all the goyim. . . . The Lord will establish thee an Holy People unto himself . . . and the goyim . . . shall be afraid of thee.") It was a manifestly viable alternative to the old Christian fashion Jews wanted buried: namely, the fashion according to which Jews rejected the salvation offered by Jesus and then killed him, and so are forever a race of outsiders who should be regarded with distrust. Among the carrots offered were expense-paid trips to the "Holy Land" (after 1948), noisily publicized B'nai B'rith awards for "brotherhood," and favorable media treatment. The media carrot could give a semi-literate, fifth-rate Christian pamphleteer with a drinking problem the public image of a modern-day Thomas Aquinas, if he took the desired positions on matters of interest to the Jews. A very credible stick was a guarantee of problems with a church's tax exemption. The strategy was resoundingly successful. With a little prodding, leading Catholic and Protestant theologians began re-examining the sacred writings of their churches, and, lo! -- the scales fell from their eyes! The Jews hadn't been responsible for the death of Jesus after all, they suddenly realized. It was the Romans, not the Jews, who had done it, they proclaimed, despite the unanimous account given by the Gospels. Actually, there was a little disagreement on the verdict for a while, with the more literal-minded theologians putting the blame solely on the Romans and the modernist theologians saying instead, "No, we are all guilty," but on one thing the theologians were in complete agreement: the poor, long-suffering, inoffensive Jews were merely innocent bystanders and must not be blamed at all. The Catholic Pope announced that Christians who held to the old fashion and continued to regard the Jews as Christ-killers were guilty of a grave sin, while the pooh-bahs of the largest U.S. Lutheran grouping (the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America) ritually excommunicated the founder of their own church, because four centuries earlier he had written that the Blameless Ones not only hated Christ but that they also had an inborn hatred of all mankind, coupled with a deceitfulness which made them so dangerous that they ought not to be tolerated in civilized society. From the shepherds the word on the new policy toward the Jews went down to all of the Christian sheep, and the dissent was minimal. Of course, not all Catholics were pleased with the transformation of their church's doctrines and practices (not just its policy toward Jews) effected by the Second Vatican Council in the early 1960s, and a few schismatics were heard rumbling in the background for a decade or more. Likewise, there were a few excessively independent Protestants who failed to fall into line immediately: one Southern Baptist potentate as late as the 1970s announced, in accord with the doctrine his church always had accepted, that Jews, as non-believers, could not be admitted into the Christian heaven. Needless to say, his colleagues fell on him like a ton of bricks for this bit of "Juden 'raus" theology, and soon he was back-pedaling as fast as he could. Today the conquest is virtually complete. A few years ago some backward Christians protested the profane image of their savior presented by Hollywood in The Last Temptation of Christ, but their protest was considered very unfashionable by the Christian establishment, and the veiled hints of "anti-Semitism" detected in some of the statements of the protesters were roundly denounced. Now Jews produce film after film which blatantly mocks the beliefs of Christian viewers: not only is there no protest, but the viewers laugh on cue. If instead of first subverting the leaders of Christendom the Jews had tried during the 1940s and 1950s to wean rank-and-file Christians away from their faith through similar mockery, there would have been a reaction from Christian leaders and laymen alike which would have made the hundreds of thousands of "Holocaust survivors" in America yearn for the good, old days under Hitler. The organizational strategy has been an appropriate one for the Jews, and it is equally appropriate for any group whose members constitute only a small minority of the population they want to persuade, and so need the advantage of leverage in order to accomplish their task.
Christianity - A Modest Defense by Yggdrasil I can recall so clearly those Sundays in my youth growing up in Cincinnati, Ohio in the 1950s. I attended a large Presbyterian church. I was one of the few who asked questions in Sunday School. And most of my questions were about the book of Matthew. I remember one Sunday school teacher in particular. He was a lawyer, and a professor at the University of Cincinnati Law school. At the tender age of 12 I had just read Matthew 23, the famous condemnation by Christ of Scribes and Pharisees. So I asked this teacher, "what is a Pharisee?" "I dunno." He did not even care enough to look it up and give me an answer in the following week! Ironic - after all, they were (among other things too numerous to mention here) the first lawyers! The same happened with other Sunday school teachers - I can recall reading Mark Ch. 7, the exchange in which the Pharisees catch Christ's followers eating bread with unwashed hands contrary to the mosaic law of Exodus, Leviticus and Deuteronomy: "7:5 Then the Pharisees and scribes asked him, Why walk not thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwashen hands? 7:6 He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.' 7:7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.' * * * 7:14 And when he had called all the people unto him, he said unto them, Hearken unto me every one of you, and understand: 7:15 There is nothing from without a man, that entering into him can defile him: but the things which come out of him, those are they that defile the man." Indeed, in these passages Christ clearly repudiates parts of the old testament - at a minimum, the dietary laws - and perhaps much else. He quotes Isaiah for the purpose of identifying much of this Mosaic law as "the commandments of men." So I asked the Sunday school teacher what else in the Old testament might Christ have repudiated. How about God's supposed injunctions to genocide in Deuteronomy Ch. 7 ? How about the ugly genocidal passages in Numbers Ch. 31? Did God really command Moses and his people to do these things, or were these passages in Numbers, like the dietary laws of Leviticus 11, merely the commandments of men, and not of God? Gee I dunno, ask the pastor! It was clear to me that the pastor would flee from the prospect of having to explain Christ's repudiation of parts of the Old Testament. Pastors do not like complexity. It stirs doubts in parishioners minds. Rather, the pastor had this ugly tendency to quote short passages out of context to support some simple moral point when the whole seemed to me a much more complex tapestry. Indeed I recall one Sunday in which our confirmation class was asked to go to the main sanctuary where a famous Dean of a Presbyterian theological seminary would be delivering the sermon. He talked about the passage that has always troubled Christians. In the moment of death on the cross, Christ says, "God, why hast thou forsaken me?" Well, it turns out that the Aramaic word that Christ used does not necessarily translate to "God the Father" but rather "Father of Israel" or more colloquially "Nation of Israel." But it was obvious to this 12 year old that if Christ said "Nation of Israel, why hast thou forsaken me?" not only did the passage suddenly make sense from the perspective of the events immediately preceding the crucifixion (the preferred construction), but it had explosive theological implications as well. Christ appears to be un-choosing the Jews in the theological sense - altering God's covenant with Moses, and, perhaps, demolishing those disturbing anti-gentile passages in Exodus about slavery for gentiles, and the requirement to charge them interest on loans. I was stunned. This man had removed many of my doubts and stubborn reservations. After all, I was not about to believe a faith the left me a second-class citizen, much less one that exposed me to divinely ordained genocidal attacks! But outside the church doors after the sermon, it became clear that the Dean's message was utterly lost on the rest of the congregation. They did not understand or like it. Too complicated. It was apparent to this 12 year-old, back in the 1950s, that Christianity was in trouble. None of the elders in my Presbyterian church cared enough to understand what Christ was really talking about. The pastor preferred the easy task of training sheep, and was perfectly content to forfeit the souls of the intellectually stronger wolves. As fate would have it, our confirmation class used to sit in a circle, and knowing in advance that there would be dull spots, I strategically placed myself opposite little Suzy, so when the energy slipped out of the session I could ponder the beauty of her legs, and of life in general. The time was well spent! Indeed, from the perspective of a White-nationalist, the question is: - to what degree might Christianity slow down the re-emergence of race consciousness of the White middle-class? The answer has two components. The first is a function of the numbers. According to the statistical department of National Review Magazine (Mar. 10, 1997 p 62), "- Presbyterians, Methodists, and Episcopalians lose nearly half their young people for good.... 48 per cent of Presbyterian youth drop out of churchgoing altogether. In 1985 a third of the nation's Methodist churches had performed no baptisms." "- The net figures: 30 per cent of Americans are totally secular in outlook, 29 per cent are barely or nominally religious, 22 per cent are modestly religious, 19 per cent (about 36 million people) regularly practice their religion." Ralph Reed, the Executive Director of the Christian Coalition, published a seminal apologia in the Wall Street Journal on March 16, 1993 page A22 with the following statistics. "According to a survey by Stanley Rothman and Robert Lichter, 86% of U.S. media leaders attend church infrequently or not at all. By contrast a survey conducted last month by the Marketing Research Institute found that 48% of Americans attend church twice or more a month. More than 100 million Americans attend church every month and approximately 30 million attend church four times a month or more. Yet few of our nation's journalists, professors and intellectuals can be found in the pews on any given Sunday." While Reed's statistics sound a bit better on first reading, a closer examination reveals that the two sets of numbers are broadly consistent (except of course the 48% figure which would yield more Americans [125 million] attending twice or more per month, than the 100 million who attend only every month). For purposes of this discussion, I assume that church attendance patterns are similar among Blacks, Hispanics, and Whites. Thus, Both sources place approximately 80% of our White population in the secular, nominally religious, or modestly religious category. It is only among the devout 20% that we might expect religiously articulated moral codes to override perceptions of political self-interest. These numbers confirm what we already should know from political outcomes we witness in the real world. If 60% of Americans were deeply religious, we would not have abortion on demand, condom distribution in the schools, and birth control without parental consent. It seems clear to me that the balance of power is held by the 60% that is completely secular or nominally religious. They will respond to perceptions of self-interest, as will most of the 22 percent share that is "modestly" religious. Based on the numbers, it is hard to argue that Christianity will significantly delay acceptance of the White racial consciousness. The second component of the answer to the question whether Christianity will slow down the re-emergence of White racial awareness is the nature of the threat and White perceptions of it. White nationalists have a simple message for their fellow Whites: Can trusting other races to treat us fairly as we slip into minority status be a smart strategy for individual Whites? The typical White professional believes that it is only the bottom 20% of Whites who are hurt by "diversity" efforts, affirmative action and quotas. They think that they and their children will never be impacted. They fail to grasp that diversity is about power and control. Power does not flow from entry level jobs. The racial extortion coalition that firmly controls our media and national government is quite comfortable with the idea of Whites serving as infantry riflemen, police, trash haulers, security guards, prostitutes and fashion models. It is the sight of White males in top positions in the Fortune 500 which enrages them. A quick reading of Ellis Cose's "The Rage of a Privileged Class" will confirm it. We have models of our future in towns and counties along the Texas border in which Whites comprise 30 to 40% of the population but hold none of the government jobs. None! The same is true of the State of Hawaii (33% White), and the District of Columbia (29% White). Both have only token numbers of Whites in their government bureaucracies. Our upper-middle class needs to understand that no matter which race is dominant, Mexicans along the Texas border, Blacks in the District, and Asians in Hawaii (Hawaii is only 2% Black and 7% Hispanic) the result is the same. Exclusion of Whites from jobs and positions of power. At Harvard, 82% of the student body consists of racial minorities plus one White ethnic group (2% of our population) that consistently votes 80% Democratic and staffs the organizations of the other groups in the racial extortion lobby. 72% of the U.S. population gets only 18% of the seats. White gentiles are under-represented at Harvard by a factor of four times relative to their share of the population. In contrast, Blacks, who comprise 12% of the population, have 8% of the seats. We are under represented 2.66 times more severely than blacks. Whatever Harvard's vision of "diversity" might be, it surely is not a vision that attempts representation in proportion to population. There is a clear loser here, and it is us. Based on the distribution of IQs and test scores among these competing populations, we would predict that our 72% of the population would be entitled to 55% to 60% of the places at Harvard, not 18%. Indeed, the picture improves only slightly when we add together the top 15 National Universities as ranked by U.S. News. Our 72% group gets only 38% of the seats. We are represented at only half our share of the population. The middle class fails to grasp the essence of the problem. All the admissions departments need do to ensure the under- representation of White gentiles at the top of our educational hierarchy is to emphasize grades over test scores. Test scores are a much better predictor of success in later life, but grades vary in meaning from school to school, and are a wondrously "flexible" tool in the hands of social engineers. Admissions officers can play all sorts of games with grades while purporting to be race-neutral. The precise game they are playing shows clearly in the numbers. Preferences for blacks and hispanics are a mere sidebar to the main story, needed only for keeping peace among the partners in the racial extortion coalition. And those racial preferences would not be needed at all but for the fact that our ghetto schools have been integrated with 20% to 30% White students who cluster at the top of their classes. Re-segregate, and the need for preferences based on race will go away. Old myths die hard. The top three ethnic/racial groups in America in income and education are Jews, Japanese and Chinese, in that order. With the next census, Indians and Pakistanis will be added. The facts of displacement at the top of the education and income spectrum are crystal clear. The problem is that the typical middle-class White sees none of this. And the White elites are especially unaware that they are the principal target. But I do not believe this failure of vision is the fault of Christianity. Rather, Europe has been so overwhelmingly powerful and prosperous, relative to the rest of the World, for so many years that displacement is unthinkable to most Whites. They simply cannot imagine it. They will absorb the message only slowly, as actual experience contradicts the propaganda that surrounds them. In truth, the regime of force and fraud that we live under is, over the long term, wildly unstable. But I suspect that the real reason why the "Christian question" is so disturbing to White nationalists is that most of us feel badly about the Churches' efforts to compound the threat to our earthly interests. We are angered by our feelings of ambivalence toward a religion that has stood at our roots and nourished our culture for 1700 years. We feel like Charles Martel, (the Eighth Century King of the Franks famed for expulsion of the Africans from Southern France) who upon hearing the crucifixion story shouted "If only I had been there with my sword!" Amen, brother Charles! It is hard to accept that the Church of Charles Martel, and his legendary followers, Roland and, a century later, El Cid Campeador, has been reduced to a caricature fit only for inclusion in Conan O'Brien's late night "wussy wagon," or worse - the rituals of mass suicide acted out upon Christianity's fringes. Reforming institutional Christianity seems like one more burden thrust on the small and beleaguered band that sees the danger clearly. But the flip side to that coin is opportunity. A single medium size church with 600 families will have an annual budget of from $400,000 to $600,000 per year. That is more than any White racialist or White nationalist organization anywhere now raises. Truth, a little bit of courage, and a little bit of just one of those budgets could go a long way. I am convinced that the words of Christ are no barrier. The bible verse most frequently cited as arguing for integration and amalgamation is the parable of the good Samaritan. Now the typical Christian minister or priest will tell you that the parable of the good Samaritan begins with Luke 10:29. But of course, you cannot understand the story unless you recognize its beginnings in Luke 10:25. "10:25 And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" The interrogator is trying to trick Christ into saying something that will justify killing him. That is a characteristic of much of Christ's life. Approximately half of his teachings are responses to questions posed by his enemies who want an excuse to kill him. The parable continues: "10:26 He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou?" 10:27 And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself." Now the word "neighbour" is critically important. It is used throughout the Old Testament to draw that all-important line between the code of amity applying to one's own tribe or race, and the code of enmity that applies to "strangers" or "sojourners" (King James) or "aliens" in the newer versions. In the old testament "neighbour" is used dozens of times and it almost always means "fellow Jew." Indeed, Christ uses a narrower term "brother" in his elaboration upon the commandment "thou shalt not kill" in his famous "Sermon on the Mount" (Matthew 5:22) restricting its moral reach in a manner consistent with the dual code that was so well understood at the time, and which was part of the law of Moses. Christ continues the parable of the good Samaritan: "10:28 And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live. 10:29 But he, willing to justify himself, said unto Jesus, And who is my neighbour?" Thus, the precise question posed to Jesus by the lawyer is, "How do you define the group which I should love as myself? In other words, who are your tribesmen or "who is a Jew"? It is an anthropological question. Jesus responds with an anthropological answer: "10:30 And Jesus answering said, A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves, which stripped him of his raiment, and wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead.10:31 And by chance there came down a certain priest that way: and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. 10:32 And likewise a Levite, when he was at the place, came and looked on him, and passed by on the other side. 10:33 But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was: and when he saw him, he had compassion on him, 10:34 And went to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, and set him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn, and took care of him. 10:35 And on the morrow when he departed, he took out two pence, and gave them to the host, and said unto him, Take care of him; and whatsoever thou spendest more, when I come again, I will repay thee. 10:36 Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves? 10:37 And he said, He that shewed mercy on him. Then said Jesus unto him, Go, and do thou likewise." To understand Christ's anthropological answer, you have to understand who the players are. The priest who ignored the injured man was a Jew and comes from the occupational class that wishes to kill Jesus to preserve its power. The Levite is from one of the 12 tribes of Israel that happens to be a tribal enemy of Christ and his followers. Of the three, the Samaritan is the only gentile, and is the only one who has compassion on the injured man. Indeed, the passage makes no sense unless you understand the racial and tribal differences. Jesus is saying that race is a matter of psychology. If a "stranger" or "sojourner" displays the code of amity toward you, then repay him in kind. Indeed, Christ's command to the lawyer "go, and do thou likewise" is a command to show mercy to the lawyer's fellow Jews, Christ and his followers, and to stop trying to kill them. On its most basic literal level, Christ is pleading for a restoration of racial solidarity. It is the same viewpoint expressed in Jean Raspail's famous novel "Camp of the Saints." One of the final seven defenders of Western Civilization on that hilltop in France had a black skin, and hailed from India, but was in every psychological sense a Westerner. In a word, he is "White." The final defenders of the West accept him as one of their own. Christ's answer in "the parable of the good Samaritan" is the same. It is a broadly "nationalist" answer. It is also indistinguishable from the answer I gave in Yggdrasil's Lesson 6 and the "What is White Nationalism?" FAQ (both available at http://www.ddc.net/ygg/) to the question "what is a race?" and "who is White?" I prefer the functional definition based on the tendency of groups to band together and compete against one another. Membership depends on psychology, and the combatants know perfectly well which side they are on. While physical features will predict 99% of the cases, ultimately it is the desire to band together and to defend the group's interests that determines membership. But more important, the functional definition allows us to identify our enemies more accurately by allowing us to recognize what Sir Arthur Keith (the British anthropologist) called "race forming behaviors," - that is, divisive sub-groupings within a biological race that set themselves apart and form new groups based upon (among other things) displays of moral superiority and higher class status that take the form of sacrificing, opposing or betraying the interests of their larger racial or national grouping. The Levites did exactly this in defining Christ and his followers as a tribal enemy. Modern liberals do the same. Note what Christ does not say. He does not say that race and tribe do not matter. Nor does he say "race does not exist." He does not say all men the world over are "neighbors" without distinction. He does not say that you must turn the other cheek even if aliens are invading and intend to displace or kill you. The good Samaritan story does not support any of the modern secular moral nostrums that command integration, amalgamation, mass surrender or any other disappearance of race, nation or tribe. The modern interpretations of these ancient words are clearly "laws written by men". It is clear to me that the Christian churches can be reformed. There is no reason why parishioners must tolerate clergymen who actively limit the range of our concerns to "saving souls" for the nether world when we are under attack in this world. They can help us repel that attack at the same time. Most readers of this newsgroup understand that the institution of slavery may be an abomination. But we now have our Bibles on CD Rom. We can find every reference to "slave" in that Bible in 20 minutes. Modern technology will keep the Church honest. Whatever else may be true of slavery, it is not possible to argue sensibly that slavery is condemned by the Bible. It isn't. Similarly, it is now impossible to conceal from the typical parishioner the aggressive attitudes of Christ towards his tormentors, and the obvious dual code he carried with him and repeatedly displayed in his unvarying and pre-judged reactions toward pharisees and Levites. It is impossible to keep parishioners from assembling Oxford English Dictionary style analyses of every use of the term "neighbour" or "brother." It is impossible to keep the curious young 12 year-old in confirmation class from focusing on the incredible cynicism with which Christ himself regarded the clergymen (scribes, pharisees, hypocrites, vipers) of his own time. In short, modern technology makes it much tougher for clergymen to lie about what the Bible means and get away with it. If we may return to Ralph Reed's apologia, he makes the point that: "Part of the answer lies in the church's abdication of its responsibility to the broader culture. After the Scopes trial of 1925, people of faith withdrew to their churches, creating a cultural ghetto of their own making. Their recent re-entry into civic life after decades of neglect has been greeted with fear." The modern Christian church craves social respectability above all else. It will bend with the winds, as is has for the past two centuries. The church is a follower, the least dangerous estate. The major problem confronting the movement favoring White racial awareness is the White triumphalist message that many racially conscious Whites seem to prefer. By "White triumphalism", I mean messages about how wonderful our culture is, how powerful it is, and the marvels of our science and technology. The problems are two-fold: First, White triumphalism is the public image that allows liberals to caricature White racial awareness as mean-spirited and selfish. After all, if White civilization is so powerful and successful, how can you justify restricting third world access to it? Opposing affirmative action and immigration looks like denying entry level jobs to poor people who just want a chance to contribute and succeed. White triumphalism yields the moral high-ground. Second, if White culture and civilization is indeed so wonderful and powerful, then why not fight among ourselves over who should control it? After all, there is plenty of wealth and power to go around, and weakening Western culture and dissipating a little of that power is nowhere near as important as the question of which classes of Whites shall control it! Indeed, White triumphalism is the "sine qua non" of liberalism - the image that makes White elites comfortable about their race-forming behaviors - those intense efforts to set themselves apart from and above their fellow Whites. In truth, Western culture today means McDonalds and Coke, not Bach or Beethoven! The White culture we export is straight from the sewers of Hollywood. We are not wealthy. Since the 1980's the ratio of total debt to GDP has risen from about 1.4 times to 2.6 times. We are a society that consumes more than we produce. Each year an additional 3% of our GDP is borrowed. The U.S. may have a potent military, but it marches strictly to the tune of alien foreign powers. Israel first, and a couple of newcomers. Japan holds over a trillion dollars of federal debt. They pay tens of millions of dollars each year to consultants and lobbyists in Washington to make sure that their trade surpluses with us are allowed to continue and that they can continue to buy those bonds. If we do anything to displease them, they will sell those bonds, drive interest rates up 400 basis points, and produce a nasty recession. Private institutions in the U.S. that have real levers of power are acquisition targets of Japan. Sony has already bought Columbia Pictures. More acquisitions will follow, as they learn the business. Liberal democracy has left us open to foreign domination. Buying our politicians is much cheaper and much safer than starting a war to attain similar objectives. Recently, China has been playing the same game, generating huge trade surpluses, buying treasury bonds, and buying our White House in the last election. They have discovered how easy it is to get power over us. The typical White baby boomer loves the cheap foreign goods that generate these trade surpluses. The sad truth is that Whites in the United States and Europe have nothing to wax triumphal about. Our civilization is a debt- addicted cesspool in which Whites are irresistably drawn to modern- day glass beads - BMWs and Guess Jeans - the bright shiny objects that trap the primitive mind! Overpriced baubles have us completely in thrall. We have handed our future over to our creditors. It is the kind of behavior you would expect from primitive slaves. The economic philosopy of modern Whites is neither capitalism nor free enterprise, but rather ponzi schemes, multi-level marketing, "Dare to be Great," and "something for nothing". It is only when the White elites begin to perceive this pattern as a threat to their own and their children's interests that racial consciousness will re-emerge. The Christian church will remain a passive observer from the sidelines, for the truth is that Christianity is in full retreat along with the White race. Absent reform, it will wait until the dust settles and then slip comfortably into its modern role of providing moral justification for the victor
I'm Pastor Dave Barley of America's Promise Ministries, a national outreach ministry which is dedicated to preaching and teaching the Word of God to the "elect", God's called out and chosen. While it is certainly true that our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ is the creator of all things (all of creation), His instructions for the well-being of His creation is given unto the seed of Jacob (Israel). Throughout the Bible, they are variously called the seed of Abraham, Isaac's seed, the seed of Jacob, or the children of Israel who are erroneously referred to by many modern day ministers as the Jews. The truth is that most Jews today are not of any Semitic origin, but are Khazars who are more closely related to the Hun, Uigur and Magyar tribes, than to the seed of Abraham. I recommend all truth seekers obtain a copy of the book The Thirteenth Tribe,by Arthur Koestler, (available from America's Promise Ministries) which documents many of these historic facts. THE TRUE SONS OF ISRAEL In the Scriptures, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are always called 'Hebrews', NEVER 'Jews'. The problem is that most Christians have not been taught that there is a definite, distinct, and important difference between the terms Jew and Israel. This ministry has several important Bible studies on this subject that will help you gain a greater understanding of Israel's true identity and why the Anglo Saxon, Scandinavian, Germanic, and kindred people are suffering because they have a lack of knowledge concerning their true Biblical identity. A careful study of the Covenants and Promises concerning Israel, the sons of Isaac, and their divinely guided pilgrimage into the various nations they were led, will bless and stir your heart. When we find modern nations whose history parallels every Bible prophecy concerning Israel, we may then be certain that we have discovered every branch of Israel's family with whom Jesus Christ has sealed His everlasting covenant. History will show that the Celto-Saxon people have been the main builders, designers, engineers, explorers, and even humanitarians in comparison to any other race or nationality. When a third world nation is in need, it is not the black nations of Africa, the Chinese, the Indians, or Oriental nations, but the White/Caucasian directed nations of the world who offer a helping hand. GOD'S LAW, AND OUR DESTINY Our purpose though, is not limited to just teaching the correct identity of the lost sheep of the House of Israel. The whole counsel of God Almighty's divine Word is our main objective. As an example, most denominations teach that God's divine law was abolished by Jesus Christ's death upon the cross, and that we are no longer subject to His divine edicts. Through this erroneous teaching, many Christians have the mistaken belief that the Old Testament is mainly for contributing good Bible stories, but that our understanding of God's Word should be mainly limited to the New Testament. Well, we certainly uphold the validity of the New Testament/Covenant, but we likewise do not invalidate the laws, statutes, judgements, and prophetic utterings of the Old Testament. After all, when Christ quoted Scripture in His teachings, He quoted the so-called outdated Truth of the Old Testament. WHAT IS SIN? Those who belittle the importance of God's laws open the door for humanistic relativism and tyranny. If God's laws are obsolete, then whose law, standards and values will you follow? How can you even stand against "SIN", when you have invalidated the very standard upon which sin is to be determined. 1 John 3:4 states: "Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law." This important Bible passage unequivocally establishes the means by which sin can be identified, and that means is God Almighty's Divine Law. "For sin is the transgression of the law." WHAT DID JESUS SAY, CONCERNING GOD'S LAW? Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 5 vs 17-19) Please notice, Jesus said, "Think not that I am come to destroy the law...but to fulfil." He went on to say "Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." Well, I ask you friends, has all been fulfilled? The sad fact of the matter is that we make Christ a liar, if we claim the law has been put away. Furthermore, Jesus also warned us in these verses of those who would both break God's laws, and "teach" others so, that they would be "called the least in the kingdom of heaven."No, friends, the only things of the law that were fulfilled, were the old Levitical priestly rituals of blood sacrifices, because Jesus Christ became our supreme and righteous sacrifice. He is the great Redeemer of Israel. As stated so eloquently by the late C.R. Dickey, author of the book One Man's Destiny: "The next sweeping world revival will come when Christian Anglo-Saxons under the New Covenant realize that they too are Abraham's posterity --the children of those ancient Israelites who walked with God under the Old Covenant. These truths will renew in men's minds a dynamic faith in the Bible as the very Word of God; they will create a hunger for more knowledge of God's plans and a thirst for His righteousness; they will remove God's kingdom from the fanciful realm of imagination and put it into a world of reality where its principles and laws may function."
A Call to White Americans by Jennifer Passmore Today's white American faces a frightening and uncertain future. As his race falls from majority to minority status, he often fears losing his place in the world. All around him, persons of other races raise the flags of their mother nations, adorn themselves with traditional costumes, and celebrate ancient and invented holidays as expressions of their ethnicity: generally, he has no one flag to raise except the Stars and Stripes. In the great melting pot, before the salad bowl conception, his ancestors put aside their ethnic differences and intermarried: Irish and Italian, English and French, Polish, Dutch, Swedish or German, all mingled over the generations to produce the white American. He lost his ethnicity, and retained only his race. During his father's generation, that was enough: his father had a strong identity as an American. His father had an American history, an American mythology, an American set of values. He celebrated American holidays and ate American foods. Above all, he knew what it was to be American: the American identity needed no definition. Now, in the salad bowl era, the American identity has no definition. America has no one history, no one value system, and in the current conception should not. The American nationality has been reduced to mere citizenship, the common fabric of American life unraveled to a single thread. And so the white American drifts, his group identity reduced to nothing but a passport and a color - a lack of color. Blanc, Blank. On that blank white page of his withered identity, many people write their stories. The white American child learns he is the son of rapists and enslavers, murderers and thieves, liars and hypocrites. The accomplishments of his ancestors and brothers, he is told, belong to the entire world: the guilt of any white criminal belongs to him and him alone. Among all the races, ethnicities, and other variously defined demographic groups, the white American alone cannot feel pride in, defend, or even define his racial identity without arousing suspicion and outright hatred. He cannot form a Congressional White Caucus. He cannot hang the works of white artists on a gallery wall and identify them as such. He has no month, no week, not even a day set aside to teach his children, his neighbors, and his countrymen about the origins of the white race, ancient and modern white history, the accomplishments of white individuals and the issues facing modern white people. Deprived of his true history and a healthy sense of himself, the white American can turn to either of two extremes. He can fall in with his own slanderers, giving himself over to self-flagellation, with guilt for his tradition and a hairshirt for his ethnic costume; or, he can follow the slanderers of others, substituting hatred of others for love of himself, clad forever in battle gear, paranoid and joyless. Neither path leads to a better future: the responsible white American must blaze a new trail. If we want to live, white Americans must begin today to lay the foundations for our future and our children's future. An individual without a strong group identity, a racial, ethnic, religious or national identity, will be lost like a lone snowflake among glaciers in the near future: we white Americans must rebuild our ruined sense of self. We must raise a fortress to defend ourselves against slanderous attacks: we must create a school in which to teach our children, our neighbors and our countrymen about ourselves. We must clear a festival ground on which to celebrate our achievements: we must plant a quiet grove in which to contemplate the errors of our past. We must remember to leave a door and leave it open to mutually respectful relations with all other people and peoples. Perhaps most important of all, we must erect a freewheeling marketplace where ideas and stories, histories and traditions from all the white world come together, complex and wonderful, diverse and still unified, showing that we are not the white of untinted paint but the white of sunlight, formed by the perfect balance of a whole spectrum of vibrant colors. Start today, fellow white Americans. Look at the faces around you: find the faces like yours, and see them as your brothers and sisters. Find the fair-skinned babies, and see them as your children. Think about your great-grandparents and love them as they were. Think about your history, American history, European history, world history, from the weavers of Xinjiang to the poets of Ireland, from the horsemen of the Caucasus to the seafarers of Scandinavia - all of them your brothers! And if the papers insult you today, if a stranger or your neighbor eyes you with suspicion or hostility because of your whiteness, resist the urge to respond in kind. Defend yourself--love yourself--but rise above savage tribal struggle. You are better than that. Tonight, talk openly about being white with anyone. Do it again tomorrow, and the next day, and the next. Form groups to discuss issues, trade ideas, and educate one another; however, don't forget to have picnics, play games, and enjoy yourself. This is how we must begin: proceed with joy. Ms. Passmore is an American student, studying for an MBA in International Business at Schiller International University in Heidelberg, Germany. She completed her undergraduate studies in Russian at the University of Florida.
Christianity--Religion of the West by Prof. Revilo P. Oliver The late Revilo Oliver was Professor of the Classics at the University of Illinois in Urbana and was one of America's greatest patriots. "These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go NOT unto the way of the heathen...but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." (Matt. 10:5-6) YOU, WHO ARE now reading these lines, and I are strangers. I have no means of knowing whether you are a Christian or an atheist. That, however, will not matter, so long as we talk about facts and not wishes. The observed and verifiable facts of the world about us are not affected by religious faith or the lack of faith. Christians and atheists must find themselves in perfect agreement when they affirm that lead is more malleable than steel, that the earth is an oblate spheroid rotating on its axis, that whales are mammals, that Germany was defeated and devastated by the many nations allied against her in 1945, and that the Chinese are Mongolians. About such matters there can be no dispute among Western men, who instinctively accept the reality of the world about us and CANNOT believe, as do many Orientals, that it is merely an illusion in the mind of a dreamer. If we would salvage and restore our civilization -- the Occidental culture that is peculiarly our own and that now seems to be disintegrating and rotting before our very eyes -- we must do so as Western men, by observing reality objectively and by reasoning from it dispassionately. And when we try to compute what resources remain to us, we need first of all to determine the actual strength of the Christian tradition at the present time. The West and Christianity Synonymous It is a fact, which Christians will regard with satisfaction and some atheists may deplore, that Western civilization in the sense that the great majority of the people belonging to it (though never, at any time, ALL of them) believed implicitly in the truth of the Christian revelation. That religious unanimity was for a long time so nearly complete that, after the fall of the Roman Empire and the evanescence of hopes for its restoration, we of the West regarded our religion as the bond that united us and distinguished us from the rest of the human species. During the Middle Ages, our ancestors occupied the greater part of Europe, and, until they discovered the American continents, they lived only in Europe, but despite that geographical unity, they did not generally refer to themselves as the Europeans. For all practical purposes, furthermore, our ancestors belonged to the same division of the White race: they, like the true Greeks and the true Romans before them, were all members of the great race that we now call Indo-European or Aryan, but they had in their languages no word to designate their blood relationship and biological unity. Thus, when they referred to the unity of which they were always conscious as something transcending the constantly shifting territorial and political divisions of Europe, they called themselves Christendom. And for many centuries that word was adequate and misled no one. For many centuries the West was Christendom and its civilization was indubitably Christian: that, whether you like it or not, is an historical fact. There is a complementary historical fact that was less obvious at the time and that even thoughtful men overlooked or tried to ignore until the events of the past two decades made it indubitable: Christianity is a religion of the West, and, for all practical purposes, ONLY of the west. It is not, as its polemical adversaries so often charge, a Semitic cult, for it has never commanded the adhesion of any considerable number of [Semites], and it is not, as Christians once generally believed, a universal religion, for experience has now proved that it cannot be successfully exported to populations that are not Indo-European. Ascertained Facts Undeniable Experience has also proved that it does not do the slightest good to deny ascertained facts. The men of Classical antiquity knew, of course, that the earth is spherical, and Eratosthenes in the third century B.C. calculated its circumference as 24,663 miles. But the early Fathers of the Church, living in the age of growing ignorance that shrouded the last century of the Roman Empire, decided, on the basis of some statements in the Old Testament, that the earth ought to be flat or, at least, no more curved than a shield. Lactantius was the most eloquent and probably, therefore, the most influential of the many who assiduously demanded that the earth be flat and so imposed on their contemporaries the conviction that it was. In the Middle Ages, to be sure, there were some learned men, such as Buridan, who knew that the globe is a globe, but they, like learned men today, who all know very well that talk about the equality of races is utter nonsense, usually refrained from publicly denouncing fashionable delusions. It was not until the Fifteenth Century that the truth became again inescapable, but when it did, the Christians, being men of the West, who do not deny the lessons of experience, surrendered the comfortable error in which they had once generally believed; and since that time, no rational Christian has doubted that the earth is spherical. Western Civilization Unexportable Today, as in the Fifteenth Century, Western men have had to discard a congenial assumption to bring their conception of the world into conformity with observed reality. So long as we of the West held unquestioned dominion over the whole earth, we permitted ourselves to assume that our civilization in general, and our religion in particular, could be exported and made universal. We did not sufficiently observe that talent for mimicry is common to all human beings and indeed to all anthropoids; that all human beings stand in awe of those who have power over them; and that a genius for dissimulation and hypocrisy is hereditary in the most intelligent Orientals. Even with these oversights, the evidence against our assumption was fairly clear, but in the pride of our power we felt that we could indulge an assumption that was so congenial to the romantic generosity that is a peculiarity of our race. But the events of half a century, and especially of the past two decades, have shown us, beyond peradventure of doubt, the shape of the world in which we live. We now know what our prolonged missionary effort, cultural as well as religious, accomplished -- and how its visible effects were produced. Conversion by Cannon When Cortes and his small but valiant band of iron men conquered the teeming empire of the Aztecs, he was immediately followed by a train of earnest missionaries, chiefly Franciscans, who began to preach the Gospel to the native and soon sent home, with naive enthusiasm, glowing accounts of the conversions they had effected. Their pious sincerity and innocent joy still lives in the pages of Father Shagun, Father Torquemada, and many others. For their sake I am glad that the poor Franciscans never suspected how small a part they played in the religious conversions that gave them such happiness. Far, far more persuasive than their sermons and their book had been the Spanish cannon that breached and shattered the Aztec defenses, and the ruthless Spanish soldiers who slew the Aztec priests at their own altars and toppled the Aztec idols from the sacrificial pyramids. The Aztecs, Tepanecs, and other natives accepted Christianity, not because their hearts were touched by alien and incomprehensible doctrines of love and mercy, but because it was the religion of the White men whose bronze cannon and mailclad warriors were invincible. Military force -- Not Love That was early in the Sixteenth Century and even then there were not wanting indications that should have given pause to a critical mind, but we of the West went on repeating that found mistake for four centuries, as the missionaries whom we sent to all parts of the world wrote home glowing reports of the number of "hearts" they had "won for Christ." It was only after our enemies' campaign of "anti-colonialism" really got under way that most of us realized that what had won all those hearts was primarily the discipline of British regiments and the manifest power of the White man. We now know what happened. On many a shore of Africa, for example, missionaries eager to "win souls for Christ" ventured to land alone, and the aborigines, after mutilating and torturing them for a good communal laugh, ate them, cooked or raw according to the custom of the local cuisine. Usually, a few weeks or a few months later, a British cruiser hove to off shore and lobbed half a dozen 4.5 shells into the native village, and, if not pressed for time, landed half a company of marines to beat the bushes and drag out a dozen or so savages to hang on convenient trees. Consequently the tribe, if not very obtuse, took the hint and respected the next bevy of missionaries as some how representing the god of thunder and lightning. And if the men of God distributed enough free rice and medical care with their sermons, they were able to make "converts," as the natives learned to utter the words that Christians like to hear. White Missionaries Murdered That is, in essence, the whole history of "winning souls" among the savages. There were, of course, many local variations. If the first missionaries were preceded by troops or White settlers, the Blacks had already been convinced of the virtues of Christian rifles and had learned that White men should not be regarded as esculent comestibles. If often happened, however, that the natives, ever after many years of preaching and conversion, rejected the White man's odd rites very emphatically, and a fresh supply of missionaries was needed. In 1905, for example, the Maji-Maji conspiracy in Tanganyika murdered all the missionaries and almost all the White men and women in the entire territory, and it required a German regiment and several companies of marines to restore the teaching of the Gospel. That was done by giving some forty or fifty thousand demonstrations that a Mauser bullet could penetrate even a Black hide that had been most carefully anointed with the grease of a boiled baby. The Christian missionaries did teach a ritual and often inculcated a superstition that had some superficial substance of Christianity, but they might as well have followed the example of St. Francis and preached sermons to the birds. That is why the many, many thousands of devoted Christians who expended their whole lives to "save souls" built only an edifice of cardboard and tinsel that is now gone in the wind. Christianity Incomprehensible to Natives What the vanishing of that flimsy facade has made obvious was predictable from the first. The religion of the West has never been comprehensible to the rudimentary minds of Congoids, Capoids, and Australoids; races so primitive that they were congenitally incapable of inventing a wheel and even of using one without supervision -- races that could not develop for themselves even the first and simplest preliminaries of a civilization. When the missionaries invented systems of writing the crude languages of the primitives, they had also to invent words to express such concepts as 'God', 'soul,' 'justice,' 'morality,' and 'religion' -- invent them by either creating new words or by perverting to such meanings sounds that in the native jargons conveyed impressions that were faintly and remotely analogous. That fact alone should have made us think. It was clear, furthermore, that the "converts," even those who had been most thoroughly imbued with an awe of the god of repeating rifles and locomotives, would conform to the White man's morality only under coercion, and that whenever they escaped from the White man's supervision they spontaneously reverted not only to their own mores but also to whatever form of voodoo they had practiced before. Even if earlier experience had not been conclusive, what happened in Haiti at the very beginning of the Nineteenth Century should have removed the last lingering doubt. But the missionaries did not learn, and the "Ladies' Missionary Society" went on contributing their mites, plying their needles, and glowing with tender emotion for the sweet little savages depicted by their romantic imaginations. Although it is true that in some places in the former colonial possessions missionaries are still tolerated, if they are obsequious to the natives and pay very well, we have at least learned that the Gospel follows the British regiments in the White man's ignominious and insane retreat from the world that was his.
The "Prophecy" The Franklin Prophecy was first published in February, 1934, in William Dudley Pelley�s publication, Liberation. (In 1942 Pelley was convicted of sedition and given a 15-year sentence.) The following is the most common version of the faked speech: There is a great danger for the United State of America. This great danger is the Jew. Gentlemen, in every land the Jews have settled, they have depressed the moral level and lowered the degree of commercial honesty. They have remained apart and unassimilated; oppressed, they attempt to strangle the nation financially, as in the case of Portugal and Spain. For more than seventeen hundred years they have lamented their sorrowful fate � namely, that they have been driven out of their mother land; but, gentlemen, if the civilized world today should give them back Palestine and their property, they would immediately find pressing reason for not returning there. Why? Because they are vampires and vampires cannot live on other vampires --they cannot live among themselves. They must live among Christians and others who do not belong to their race. If they are not expelled from the United States by the Constitution within less than one hundred years, they will stream into this country in such numbers that they will rule and destroy us and change our form of Government for which we Americans shed our blood and sacrificed our life, property and personal freedom. If the Jews are not excluded within two hundred years, our children will be working in the field to feed Jews while they remain in the counting houses, gleefully rubbing their hands. I warn you, gentlemen, if you do not exclude the Jews forever, your children and your children�s children will curse you in their graves. Their ideas are not those of Americans, even when they lived among us for ten generations. The leopard cannot change his spots. The Jews are a danger to this land, and if they are allowed to enter, they will imperil our institutions.
Miscegenation: The Morality of Death History has taught us that the most fundamental necessities for the existence of a healthy and progressive White society are the racial quality of its members and a moral code or value system which complements and enhances that quality. Ultimately, of course, the former is much more fundamental than the latter. Only a sound race can give birth to sound racial ethics. Without the living biological entity, there is and can be nothing. But as long as the race survives--as long as the potential for effective racial sovereignty exists--alien and spiritually damaging values alone will not prove fatal. The enemies of our race have obviously long understood this truth. That is why, a half-century ago, they waged the most vicious war the world has ever seen in order to destroy an idea based upon that racial truth. That is why they subsequently organized the systematic swamping of White civilization by millions of alien immigrants. And that is why they have used their control of the news and entertainment media, of the government, and of schools and universities to implement a massive propaganda campaign to encourage miscegenation between Whites and non-Whites. Of course, miscegenation is not a natural occurrence. Evolution would have been impossible if every evolutionary experiment had been short-circuited by cross-breeding. Nature's urge toward higher and more complex life forms has demanded that subspecies remain genetically isolated until all possibility of genetic admixture has been removed. Even though such isolation of the various human subspecies from one another has not been of sufficient length to ensure the impossibility of genetic admixture, it has ensured the existence of deep-seated psychological barriers which, under natural conditions, prevent miscegenation. When these natural conditions are disrupted and distorted, however, unnatural sexual activities such as homosexuality and miscegenation have been known to result. Just as bulls have been known to mount mares, and St. Bernard dogs have tried to mate with Chihuahuas when forced into close confinement and deprived of their natural environment, so Whites have copulated with Negroes in similar circumstances. It is the disruption of the White man's natural environment and the dehumanization of his society and culture, therefore, which the Jews and their collaborators in the news and entertainment media have consistently worked for in order to encourage racial mixing. This campaign began at least as early as 1967, when 16 U.S. states still had laws against miscegenation. In that year Jewish director/producer Stanley Kramer brought out the film Guess Who's Coming to Dinner, starring Katherine Hepburn and Spencer Tracy as a couple whose daughter begins an affair with a Negro. The aim of the film was clear and since has been admitted. It was designed as an "educational film" for White Americans: after seeing their on-screen heroes, Tracy and Hepburn, surrendering their White daughter to a Black male, they would feel less compunction in doing the same. 1 Since that time Whites have not just been encouraged to mate with Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians, they have been subject to every conceivable Pavlovian method to blackmail and bully them emotionally into doing so. With ever increasing intensity the message has been that miscegenation is not just an option, but the option that society expects. Particularly, the primary aim of the Political Correctness movement, in all of its manifestations, has been to confuse heterosexual Whites and make them feel sinful and guilty for being White; to encourage them to "repent" by helping put their race out of existence. The Hollywood film Last of the Mohicans, which came out in 1992 with the Jewish actor Daniel Day-Lewis in the leading role, is a typical example of how the Jewish news and entertainment media have spearheaded this campaign. In the film White males are portrayed as weak, cowardly, disloyal, and barbaric--and as justly deserving of their slaughter at the hands of the noble, dignified, courageous, and sexy Red Indians. Yes, just to ensure that White women don't miss the implication that White men are worthless, the leading White female character dumps her despicable British-officer fianc� and runs off into the sunset with the Mohican hero. The underlying message of the film is clear: race-mixing is not only natural and understandable, it is also the morally right thing to do. Zoologists and anthropologists have identified two types of feral constraint which ensure that under natural conditions animal groups--including human groups--which may be able to interbreed with each other refrain from doing so. On one hand, there are inborn biological impulses based upon physical "sign stimuli," such as smell, color, and visual differentiation. Then there is the behavioral imprinting and habituation which takes place in the early weeks and months of infancy based upon the intimate relationship between the mother and the infant. This helps to ensure that when sexual mating is eventually attempted, it will take place only with those forms that resemble the parent or siblings. 2 Not surprisingly, the Jews have gone all out to corrupt and cripple the latter tendency in Whites, particularly under the guise of "children's entertainment." In 1994, for example, the Walt Disney Company brought out a re-adaptation of its 1967 film The Jungle Book. This was Disney's first children's offering since being taken over by the Jewish clique headed by Michael Eisner, and, predictably, it was a complete distortion, both of the original Kipling story and the 1967 Disney animated version. With a story line remarkably similar to Last of the Mohicans, the White heroine rejects her British-officer fianc� for an Indian jungle boy played by a Chinese actor. Significantly, the White girl's decision is portrayed as being based upon moral considerations of right and wrong, upon her realization that White society and White men in particular are irredeemably bad. Eisner pursued this line in the two subsequent Disney animated children's films, Pocahontas and The Hunchback of Notre Dame, which are similar both in their pernicious race-mixing propaganda and in their blatant disregard for the original stories. Such systematic consistency in shape and content suggests design rather than coincidence. In any case, the actual motivation of Michael Eisner in churning out such material is not the most important question. The thing that really matters is the actual effect of his efforts: young children are being influenced, at an age where they are most open to behavioral imprinting, with a message that miscegenation is good and morally correct, and that Whiteness is evil and morally wrong. Just as young Whites in the past were encouraged by an alien religious dogma to feel sinful because of their natural sexual urges, to feel unclean in having them, and to seek "salvation" by denying them, so today they are indoctrinated with guilt-inducing ideas about being White. And the solution which they are offered to overcome these artificial feelings of guilt and self-hate is increasingly clear: mate with a non-White partner and have mongrel offspring. Racial suicide is thus insidiously presented to them as the only way in which they can overcome their Whiteness and all the consequent pain and shame that goes with it. Actually, miscegenation has rapidly emerged as the official religion of the New World Order and its adherents. Propagated with an increasingly hysterical fervor, it has been developed as the new universal slave-morality which embraces and transcends established religions such as Christianity. In March 1994, for example, evangelist Billy Graham's publication Christianity Today urged readers to rejoice over the existence of mixed-race marriages and mixed-race children and to do everything possible to make them fully accepted into society. It even stated that this is one area where the news and entertainment media are morally ahead of the churches. This propagation of miscegenation as an ideological crusade also has made significant inroads into the education system. When a North Carolina middle school principal recently cautioned a White female student and a Black male student about the dangers of interracial dating, he was immediately suspended from his job and disciplined. He was not allowed to return to work until he had been "reeducated" after confessing and repenting his "sins" in a counseling and sensitivity training program. 3 The ideological nature of this campaign to promote miscegenation was also reflected in an article in the August 1996 issue of Maryland Family Magazine, part of the Times Mirror group. Written by Helen Armiger, described as a candidate for ordained ministry in the United Methodist Church, "How to Raise an Unbiased Child" argues that society is compelled to teach its youth to live harmoniously and productively within a global environment. Quoting approvingly a Maryland education official, Arminger insisted that there exists a moral obligation to provide children with the opportunity to engage in a variety of relationships with people of different races and sexual orientations without any kind of parental or social constraint. Behind the high-sounding slogans portraying miscegenation as morally imperative and beneficial, the motivation of its proponents is clear: the intention is not to "save" or "redeem" Whites, but to destroy them completely. What such "morality" really derives from is a totally subjective, alien mind-set which seeks the biological extinction of the White race, and which, from its own perspective, sees such an extinction as a good and righteous thing. Some of its proponents are much more honest than others in admitting to this reality. One journal, Race Traitor, edited by Noel Ignatiev and subtitled "Treason to Whiteness is Loyalty to Humanity," openly declares its conviction that the only way to solve the social problems of the age is to abolish the White race. Its admitted aim is not "multiculturalism" or "multiracialism," but biological unity and racelessness. 4 Such thinking is not confined to the political fringes. On September 29, 1996, The New York Times Magazine ran an article by Jewish writer Stanley Crouch (author of the book The All-American Skin Game: Or, the Decoy of Race ). Entitled "Race is Over," Crouch's article confidently predicted that a century from today unprecedented levels of racial mixing--of a wide variety of combinations--will ensure that the very concept of race will be redundant. Americans of the future, it argues, will find themselves surrounded in every direction by people who are part Asian, part Latin, part European, part American Indian. The sweep of body types, combinations of facial features, hair textures, eye colors, and what are now "unexpected skin tones" will, in Crouch's view, be far more common because the current paranoia over mixed marriages should be by then largely a superstition of the past. Even this declared goal, however, reveals only part of the agenda, because one particular race has an exemption ticket from this universal morality of genetic amalgamation. But The New York Times Magazine article symbolizes what the Politically Correct movement is really all about. When the mainstream Harper's Magazine runs articles advocating government- sponsored summer camps for young White girls to meet and begin relationships with non-White males, it is not doing "good" for those girls; it is actively encouraging what is most definitely bad for them. And when the Prudential Insurance Company of America sponsors a series of racial unity conferences for children across America and the world, it is not doing what is "right" for those children; it is doing what is totally and utterly wrong for them. Actually, such "morality" is without any moral foundation whatsoever. It's not based on any natural or biological law, nor does it follow any rational or scientific line of reasoning. This helps to explain why it is having some difficulty in achieving its objectives. Undoubtedly many Whites preach the cause of miscegenation, and many have put it into practice. But, revealingly, the numbers in the latter camp are still much smaller than in the former. Some of the Whites who advocate race-mixing are obviously unhealthy in a genetic sense, and mentally ill as opposed to spiritually sick. The person who wrote to his local newspaper recently stating his frustrated wish to have five per cent Black blood in his ancestry so as to blend in with what he considers the ideal American racial composition, may be an example. 5 In any case, in instances such as these miscegenation could even be considered a tool of natural selection in weeding such people out of the White gene pool. For the majority of Whites who advocate miscegenation, however, their sense of righteousness in espousing it is nothing more than a manifestation of trendiness: of wanting to feel and appear fashionable. Take, for example, the case of the young Hollywood couple Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman. Both appear to be healthy and physically attractive specimens of Aryan humanity. Yet they have recently adopted a Black child and actively collaborated with the Jewish media in publicizing it as a fine and noble deed which has helped the cause of human and societal "progress." There is nothing biologically wrong with this couple; they've just gone out of their way to make a fashion statement. And the adopted child is nothing more than a fashion accessory for their symbolic commitment to the idea of miscegenation. Indeed, it is revealing that for all their fashion consciousness, Cruise and Kidman chose to marry each other rather than non-Whites: they chose to adopt a non-White child rather than to create one. Even they, therefore, whether conscious of it or not, are evidence that most Whites are not yet putting the idea of miscegenation into practice--regardless of the lip service which they might feel compelled to give it. A recent study of miscegenation statistics by Jewish academic Douglas J. Besherov, resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, seemed to give some credence to this view, although the report highlighted some very disturbing trends. These included a tripling of marriages between Whites and Blacks since 1970, and a sharp increase in marriages between Whites and Asians or Hispanics. The U.S. Census Bureau counted about 150,000 interracial marriages nationwide in 1960. By 1990 that number grew tenfold to 1.5 million. In 1994 it was estimated at more than 3 million. Equally alarming was the statistic that 35.4 percent of White women married to Black men said they planned to have children, a higher proportion than the 29 percent of White women married to White men who said they wanted children. This is on top of a four-fold increase in mixed-race births since 1970, although not all of these involved a White parent. Such trends are obviously ominous and potentially catastrophic by pointing in the long term to the biological extinction of White America. In the short term, however, from the perspective of those of us trying to prevent such a nightmare from unfolding, they do provide at least some grounds for optimism and opportunity. Despite 30 years of Judeo-Christian brainwashing, over 90 per cent of Whites are declining to transgress what Douglas J.Besherov admits is American society's "last taboo." Similarly, despite the efforts of Senator Howard Metzenbaum (D-OH, now retired), who in 1994 introduced the Multiethnic Placement Act in the Senate in an effort to bring about an increase in transracial adoptions, most Whites appear still to prefer to adopt White babies, and most non-Whites still prefer to adopt non-White babies. Such attitudes, moreover, appear to be hardening in spite of the Clinton administration's attempts to legislate against them. The Cruise-Kidman adoption, for instance, was condemned by the National Association of Black Social Workers on the grounds that transracial adoptions amounted to racial and cultural genocide. Undoubtedly an important factor in this situation has been the growth in tensions that has accompanied the transition to a multiracial society. As racial and ethnic identification has become more relevant in people's lives, the resulting racial polarization and intensified group solidarity have mitigated somewhat against the idea of interracial mating. It seems clear, for example, that the O.J. Simpson trial served the useful purpose of intensifying both White and Black racial consciousness and of discrediting the idea of miscegenation. One hopeful sign of this was the fact that Hulond Humphries, a White high school principal in Wedowee, Alabama, who was ousted from his position in 1994 for threatening to cancel the spring prom if interracial couples turned up, recently won an election runoff for superintendent of schools. As with the race question in general, many Whites--for the moment at least--seem to be carrying around with them two conflicting value systems in relation to race-mixing: the one they publicly purport to hold and the one they actually live their private lives by. While the former is artificially created and only maintained by continuous external conditioning, the latter arises from instinct, which is genetically ingrained. Thus, although race-mixing propaganda may have been purposefully designed to appeal to the subconscious and to avoid encountering rational faculties, it has inevitably come up against subconscious genetic realities which are not easily influenced by alien attempts at behavioral modification. Consequently, while it has been relatively easy to bring about widescale spiritual sickness and confusion, it has been much more difficult to implement widescale biological amalgamation. Such a situation, however, will not last forever. History is full of examples of artificial and destructive moralities triumphing over the natural order. Despite its setbacks, the cult of miscegenation has spread substantially over the last thirty years and will continue to do so. Current trends continue to point to the most fundamental and inescapable reality which confronts us today: the White race stands on the precipice of biological extinction. And one thing is certain: as the strains and tensions of this multiracial society increase in the coming years, so the campaign to destroy us through racial mixing will intensify. For this reason alone, regardless of increased racial polarization, the false morality of miscegenation will not disappear naturally. The circumstances of racial chaos will help us, but only organized and radical action on our part will achieve the vital necessity of a complete and decisive separation of the races and the final destruction of the morality of death.
"The Kosher Food Tax is the biggest consumer fraud existing in America." The bizarre claim by right wing extremists that kosher certification markings on food product labels ("" "K," etc.) cost consumers extra money and represent, in effect, a "kosher tax" to make rabbis rich, is a striking example of the propaganda used by anti-Semites to trick the uninformed into accepting conspiracy charges and stereotypes about Jews. Other anti-Semitic allegations regarding kosher designation on foods include charges that "the kosher food racket" benefits Jewish organizations while only a small segment of the American population desires such markings, and that even the meanings of the labels are guarded secrets deliberately kept from non-Jews to trick them into paying the "kosher tax"
Why White Nationalism? by Yggdrasil There are two answers to the question: "Why White Nationalism?" 1. The futility of Conservatism! As we approach the millenium, the destruction of Western Civilization in the United States is so complete that there is little left to conserve. The original understanding that brought our ancestors to the United States was the melting pot, the "color blind society" in which individuals would be judged on merit and not on skin color. The original understanding or social contract has been broken. Individuals are no longer judged by their own merit. The color blind society has simply disappeared. As a practical matter, it will never return. As a consequence there is no longer any reason for a European-American (or anyone else, for that matter) to attempt to slow down the rush towards a balkanized United States. You cannot slow down something that has already occurred. 2. To assert European-American interests in this new balkanized society. All efforts of liberals at maintaining racial peace in the United States are guided by the false assumption that hostility and anger by non-Whites is provoked by "White racism." The truth is that non-Whites would be hostile toward us even if every European-American were a saint. In every non-homogenous country in the world non-Whites have powerful racial animosities. (See Yggdrasil's lesson #2). These reactions occur whether Europeans are present or not. However, White liberals imagine that once these people arrive on our shores they lose that natural and universal propensity to dislike people of other races. To the liberal mind, Black and brown people arriving here either become "saints," devoid of the natural inclination of men everywhere to dislike people with different skin color, or become "new socialist man," motivated solely by calculations of economic self-interest and utterly devoid of racial awareness. Thus, to a liberal, whenever Blacks or browns become angry, they must have been provoked by "White racism." Now this unfortunate assumption places the average European-American in a rather awkward position. Every time Black and brown people raise a stink about their status or treatment, the liberal assumes that there must be hidden White racism somewhere, and that the way to appease the Blacks and browns is to adopt new employment quotas, more contract set-asides, new standards for race-normed testing or admissions procedures, more stringent "hate crime" laws, more stringent censorship of White speech to filter out anything that might be giving such offense, and if all that fails, direct cash handouts (paid for by the middle class, of course). Now Black and brown people are not fools, they know they are being rewarded for raising a ruckus. So far, they keep getting the same rewards for it. More ruckus leads to more benefits, more advantages, more tribute, and more humiliation of the average White by their own elites. What a country! Now for the average European-American who just commutes to work in the morning, has very little racial anger, and certainly doesn't want to foment or participate in any "revolution," all of these concessions present a dilemma. At some point, these undeserved burdens have to stop. Yet the average European-American has been so tolerant of their imposition, and the White liberal elites in charge have been so utterly naive and misguided in their judgments about race, that there is no visible mechanism or group that could possibly stop what is now beginning to look like a massive racially-based attack. There are no European-American leaders who are willing to stand up and state the obvious. It is the Blacks and browns who are racist. It is the Blacks and browns who are exploiting the race issue for advantage. At some point, the White liberal elites are either going to have to say "no" to the Black and brown racial aggressors, or those White elites will have to be replaced with someone who can. Thus there is a practical advantage to be gained by bringing White Nationalism out into the open. These White liberal elites are going to have to understand that there are competent rebels within their midst (within the information elites described by Herrenstein and Murray) who feel a moral obligation to dissent and organize average European-Americans to resist their practice of rewarding Black and brown racial aggression. It does not matter whether this practice arises out of a sincere (if obviously silly) notion that only White racism could cause Black and brown hostility, or whether this practice is conscious aggression on the part of an alienated White liberal elite motivated by a need to show contempt for their fellow European-Americans. Either way, it is going to stop. The only question is how "messy" the process of stopping these practices is going to get.
The White Holocaust Part 1 By Pastor V.S. Herrell Every white schoolchild in America has heard of the so-called Jewish Holocaust, in which millions of Jews were supposed to have been murdered by white Christian Germans during the Jew-instigated World War II. Yet, few, if any, could tell you of the true holocaust, or holocausts, of the last two centuries perpetrated by Jews against the White Race, which has resulted in the death of over one billion white people, as we shall prove hereafter. The fact remains that even though the highly inflated "official" number of Jewish deaths during the so-called Holocaust is now officially below 3,500,000 (New York Post, March 26, 1992), the estimates of white Christian deaths at the hands of the Communist Zionist Jews in Russia are as high as 45,000,000, just since the Bolshevik revolution in Russia. Millions were starved to death by Stalin and his Jewish regime, just as millions are being murdered by genocide today. Yet, few have heard of these horrors perpetrated by the mongrel Jews against the White Race. Their hatred for Christianity and Jesus Christ has compelled the Jews to institute policies of genocide, which are in force at all times. Despite the inaccurate and false portrayals of Hitler and National Socialism by the Jews, it is the Jews who are the true monsters, the true murderous devils. Jews and their Zionist vehicle of Communism have been responsible for the deaths of millions of white people - men, women, and children. The majority of Communists are Jews, and it is a fact of history that Karl Marx and his closest advisors were all antichrist Jews. The antichrist Jews forced the Communist change in Russia by slaughtering millions of bourgeoisie (the middle class) who had no desire to be ruled by Jewish Communism. They began their regime with the vicious and senseless murder of the house of the Romanovs, aided and abetted by the king of England who denied the Romanov royal family political asylum. The Encyclopedia Britannica calls the slaughter instituted by Stalin "repressive measures to control dissent." One must dig deeper to find the real truth. During World War II, Allied bombing of German railways resulted in starvation of Germans. Needed medical supplies, food, and clothing were kept out of the hands of Germans, yet the Jews paint a picture of feasting Germans keeping food from the needy Jews. The reverse is true for the Ukrainian people under Stalin. A man-made famine was created by Stalin and His Jewish fellow-travelers to starve the people into submission while Stalin and his cronies feasted. The Russian peasantry, called "kulaks," were deliberately starved and liquidated by Stalin. The Ukrainians were producing adequate grain for their own use, despite the fact that Stalin was attempting to force the inefficient method of collective farming upon them. In 1932, Stalin procured about 50% of the grain from the Ukrainians, if not more, thus producing a so-called famine. Grain towers were filled with unused grain guarded by communist military units, while the farmers who grew the grain, and could even see the towers outside their own doors, starved along with their families and young children. The grain was stolen from them at bayonet point. There was no natural cause for the so-called famine - instead, Stalin was stealing the food from the mouths of white children, deliberately starving them to death while he feasted on the fruits of their labors, all with the approval and the applause of the Jew-controlled Communist party of that era. The Ukrainians were fundamentally devout white Greek or Russian Orthodox Christians. The Jews had coveted the Ukraine for centuries and their methodical liquidation, a euphemism for genocidal murder, was little more than so-called Jewish vengeance for the imagined offenses these Christians had supposedly committed against the Jews. The murder of these white Christian Ukrainians by the cruel and agonizing method of starvation took a toll of eight to ten million. It is small wonder that the Ukrainians and Baltic peoples greeted the conquering Third Reich as freedom fighters and liberators from the tyranny of Stalin and his Jewish regime of living devils. Those Ukrainians who did not starve to death were rounded up and shot, beat to death, tortured, and mutilated, all in the name of Jewish Communism. But the greatest insult to the Ukrainian people is that committed by the Jewish American press and media even today. The Communists blamed the so-called Nazis for crimes which they had themselves committed. The hundreds of thousands of bodies said to be Third Reich murders were in truth the fiendish work of the living devil Stalin himself. What is worse is that even though empirical, indisputable evidence has proven these statements to be absolutely true, the Jewish American media continues to purposely misrepresent the crimes against humanity committed by the Stalinist Jews and blame the Germans for the crimes that the Jews actually committed. This fact alone shows a clear and demonstrable Jewish prejudice and Jewish control of the American media, so much so that it may be said that there is no alternative media in the police state now called the United States. You may say, "Well, Pastor Herrell, are you not allowed to continue to publish?" My dear friend, our feeble efforts and financial ability are but a spit in the ocean; a feeble effort that the Jews understand presents no real danger to their dictatorial monopoly of the media. As I said before, the New York Post reported the proven and truer figures for Auschwitz, showing that the Russian Communists and Jews had purposefully inflated the figures and lied. Today, the same old lies are being told in the public schools. The truth is totally ignored even though it has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt as the actual truth. In other words, it doesn't do any good to rationally and logically demonstrate the truth and show the Jews to be vicious liars. They simply ignore such noble efforts and return to the lies they have been telling. The truth is that the Ukrainians were placed in Russian gulags or labor concentration camps far worse than any labor camp ever run by Nazi Germany. "Millions of peasants died of starvation or were deported and sent to forced labour camps" (A Concise Encyclopedia of Russia, S. V. Utechin, Dutton: New York, 1964, p. 120). The Ukraine, a highly populated white area, was also experiencing at this time a surge in intellectual advancement and creativity as well as a strong desire for independence which was detrimental to the existence of the Communist regime in Moscow. Thus, Stalin instituted his final solution - forced starvation and death upon the people to break their spirit. "The next famine, that of 1932-3, was created artificially by the authorities as a means of breaking the resistance of the peasants to the collectivization of agriculture ... the grain was removed from the countryside by armed detachments chiefly composed of internal security troops and Komsomol members" (A Concise Encyclopedia of Russia, S. V. Utechin, Dutton: New York, 1964, p. 175). Of course, Stalin's real purpose was extermination of the white population. We now know that the phrase "breaking the resistance of the peasants" turned out to be a political euphemism to conceal Stalin's true intentions of mass murder. The conservative estimate for the number of deaths by starvation under Stalin's reign is 10,000,000 white Ukrainians, as reported by the Encyclopedia Britannica. Yet, other sources show the numbers to be much higher. Taking into account the full toll of Communism on the Russian people, the number reaches 45,000,000. At the Royal Albert Hall in London, on October 31, 1967, the numbers were presented as follows (let us remember that we are talking fundamentally about white people): A. Russian Revolution and Civil War - 1,500,000 B. Civilian deaths in the Civil War and Ensuing Famine - 13,000,000 C. Murders of "class enemies" - 3,000,000 D. Famine caused by disaster of first Five Year Plan (installation of collectivism) - 7,000,000 E. Stalinist purges - 1,500,000 F. Labor camp deaths, 1921-1960 - 19,000,000 Total - 45,000,000 Another angering statistic is that of the drop in enrollment of school children in the Ukraine, while non so-called famine areas showed expected increases. Because initial enrollment occurred in the USSR at seven years of age, a dramatic decrease in enrollment was seen seven years after the initiation of grain stealing from the Ukrainians in 1932. In 1929, enrollment of seven year olds was 1,585,814 students in the Ukraine. By 1938-1939, the number had decreased to 985,598. Another famine area, Byuelorussia, showed a decrease in these years from 369,684 to 358,507 (Cultural Construction of the USSR, Moscow: Government Planning Pub., 1940, pages 40-50). Thus, in these two areas there was a total decrease of 611,390. This means that at least 611,390 children under the age of 7 years were slaughtered in this time period. We must also remember that there should have been a population increase, so this number is more likely over 1,000,000, and these numbers do not take into account those students who might be older or graduating but never made it through school because their young lives were ended by the Jew front man Stalin. Someone must be held accountable for those desks that remained empty in the schools of the Ukraine and for those teachers' positions that remained unfilled. The Ukrainian population of 32 million in 1927 decreased to 28 million in 1939. Thus, there was a loss of 4,000,000 Ukrainian lives, and this number would be augmented by the normal expected population growth. At an expected population growth of 4,000,000 we are really looking at a loss, at the very least, of 8,000,000 white Ukrainians. A similar tragedy occurred in Ireland in the mid-19th century: the so-called Potato Famine of Ireland. The truth is that the English had in their possession enough food to feed the Irish, but deliberately kept it from them. Therefore the English starved to death or forced over 1,000,000 Irish from their home country. (This was only one of the most recent genocidal atrocities committed by the English against the Irish.) But we must not entirely blame the white Englishmen, for these events occurred under Jewish control. By 1868, the British had a Jewish Prime Minister, Benjamin Disraeli. This Zionist Jew was only able to gain this position of power because of the already established Jewish power base in English politics, industry, and banking. It was this Jewish power base that orchestrated the Irish famine, deliberately starving Irish men, women, and children in order to gain more economic and political power and to eradicate the Catholic and Protestant churches of Ireland. Their strategy for gaining power worked, for the Jews had gained enough power to make one of their own Prime Minister shortly thereafter, in a country that had once banned Jews from its borders.
The White Holocaust Part 2 By Pastor V.S. Herrell Still, this is only the beginning of the holocaust of the White Race. The Jewish agents who pitted white man against white man during the world wars are responsible for the deaths of those men who fought, often not even realizing it, for the Jewish agenda. After World War II, German soldiers were taken prisoner by allied nations, and civilian women and children were rounded up and placed in concentration camps. Jews often whine about family members who supposedly died in German camps, yet millions of survivors are left to spread their lies. How can there be so many survivors if so many died? Yet, we do not hear of German survivors of Russian, French, and American camps. This is because there are so few. Eisenhower's quartermaster general, Robert Littlejohn, openly complained that he had no way to feed the 4,000,000 German prisoners in US care in 1945. Many of these prisoners had been transferred to the so-called "DEF" status. This status meant instant death for the bearer, and was a violation of the Geneva Convention by Eisenhower. American camps were compared to Buchenwald, and some were reported as having no food at all anywhere in the camp. Donations of food for the prisoners were returned to donors and rations were not distributed. (This despite the fact that the majority, 58%, of U.S. soldiers thought Germans should receive relief in the form of donations.) In August, 1945, Eisenhower placed the remaining German solders in the camps on DEF status, thereby signing their death warrants. The end result was millions of German women and children being starved to death, in addition to 2,000,000 German soldiers who perished in the camps at the war's end. In the usual Jew manner, the public was lied to, and few knew of the atrocious treatment Germans were receiving at the hands of the Allies. (All this also occurred at the time of the Nurenberg trials, which have been called the greatest legal injustice in the history of America by United States Senator Robert Taft, son of President William Howard Taft.) If the horrors of concentration camp existence so often portrayed on our televisions were attributed to the Russians and the Jewish establishment of evil known as Communism, then our television would truly reflect a far more truthful and more accurate historical picture of the atrocities that took place more than fifty years ago. The gulags were indeed death camps for the systematic extermination of white people. This was not the original intent of the Germans. Most of those who died in German concentrated labor camps died of dysentery and other diseases such as pneumonia, bronchitis, and things that were then beyond the power of the German army to prevent. If the Allies had not bombed the German railway system and practiced a scorched earth policy against the German people, then the vast majority of labor camp persons would have survived the war far better than the average German citizen. It is in truth the Jews themselves and their insane bombing raids upon Germany that caused the deaths of 2.5 million Jews and other people being held in German labor camps. It is an indisputable fact that the Germans were far more humane to American prisoners and to prisoners of all nationalities than either the Russians or the Americans. 88% of American prisoners held by Germans survived the war virtually unscathed and in good condition, whereas the exact opposite figure was true of the Japanese and their treatment of American soldiers. In their camps, 88% died or were beheaded as the Japanese played ninja with the heads of defenseless prisoners of war, especially during the Batan death march. Yet, the Jews have maintained an utter prejudice against the Germans in the United States. Meanwhile, they have embraced wholeheartedly the Japanese, aiding them to gut the United States of its economic power base and setting the Japanese up as the lords of American industry to whom an ever-increasing number of Americans find themselves bowing each morning as they go to work. These are just the tragedies of the camps during and after the war. After the war, Germany itself had been divided into zones, French, Russian, American, and British. In the British zone, innocent women and children were being starved to death at the rate of 220,000 yearly. A type of reconstruction, similar to that of the American South, was forced upon the German people. The millions of deaths of white Germans were tallied as "other losses." The true number may never be known, as the American records regarding the prison camps were destroyed between 1947-1950's, and a similar story can be told regarding the other Allied camps, especially the Russians, who took almost 100,000 prisoners (including 24 German generals) at Stalingrad, and only 6,000 survived. Similar actions and many more crimes against the German people are documented in the book Other Losses: An Investigation into the Mass Deaths of German Prisoners at the Hands of the French and Americans After World War II by James Bacque. We can only know that the Jews were taking the advice of one of their biggest frauds, Albert Einstein, who publicly stated that all Germans should be killed. The Jews used this opportunity to carry out their plans of genocide against the White Race. Stalin and Roosevelt even toasted each other at the prospect of executing German officers at the war's end; and today there is absolutely no doubt that these plans were put in place not only by Stalin but by the Americans as well. So-called war criminals, especially anyone who had been connected with the SS, were hunted down and murdered, particularly in the two and three years following the end of the war. Special units of death squads or hitmen were dispatched to kidnap, murder, or take into deserted wooded areas and murder, in far too many cases, innocent Germans. The Allied records state clearly and are even bragged about on national TV that such units were engaged in this demonic, so-called work. The exact numbers of murders committed by the US hitmen cannot at this time be stated for certain. Yet, we know that it was in the thousands, if not tens of thousands. So much for so-called "humanitarian" codes of human rights. Other criminal acts of genocide were perpetrated by Jewish Communists against white Germans in Poland before the war. Numerous eyewitness accounts, by Germans and Poles, describe these acts in detail. Hundreds of pages of historic documents detail these crimes. Photographs also provide evidence. In fact, many photographs of Jewish Poles committing crimes against Germans are used by Jews as so-called proof of German "hate crimes"! The Poles did not limit themselves to starving or shooting Germans; rather, they openly brutalized them, beating them to death, disemboweling men in front of their wives and children. Children were dragged from their mothers and beaten to death by mobs. Women were raped. Men were arrested on false charges. Once arrested, most were killed or brutalized; the rest were released with death warrants. The Danzig German population literally begged Adolf Hitler to invade Poland and put a stop to the Jewish Communist atrocities against white Germans; but once again, the same old Jewish lies continue to persist on American television, totally misrepresenting the reasons for the German invasion of Poland. The fact is, Stalin had already decided that Poland would belong to him. If Hitler had not acted, Stalin would have taken all of Poland and murdered all white Germans. It is Stalin who was the true devil and aggressor. It was Stalin and his orders to the internal Jewish Polish Communist party that literally forced Hitler to invade Poland as an act of humanitarian mercy. Most white Christian Poles will be more than happy to tell the truth on this matter even today. The great Polish people have not forgotten what the Communist Jews were doing in Poland just prior to World War II. As part of the Jewish plan for white genocide in Poland, German priests and clergymen were arrested and placed in camps. One priest reports: "On Sunday, September 10, I asked the commander for permission to say a common prayer in the dormitory. The answer consisted of a flood of profanity and of blows with a club. The same thing happened when I begged to be allowed to minister to the sick and the dying. ... The camp guards received us with personal blows and took personal possessions from us; I was not even allowed to keep my New Testament. Our cells were quite empty; we had to sleep on the cold concrete floor" (Father Odilo Gerhard, O.F.M., personal testimony as published in Die Getreuen, 1939). Priests and Christian leaders were especially targeted because as Christians they had supported the Christian National Socialist movement. Children as young as four months were killed by Polish hand grenades. Others were shot or beaten to death with rifle butts. A report on these Jew atrocities states :
The White Holocaust Part 3 By Pastor V.S. Herrell "The most important finding arrived at in the investigations by the medical examiners is not to be found in the incredible bestialities, both physical and mental, as revealed by examination of the bodies. Even more important is the fact that in the great majority of the cases investigated, military weapons were clearly shown to have been used as instruments of murders" (Polish Acts of Atrocity Against the German Minority in Poland, Compiled by Hans Schadeweldt, Berlin-New York, 1940 p. 253-254). They further write that: "With indiscriminate thoroughness, people of all ages, from 4 months to 82 years of age, were murdered; and that even women in a very advanced stage of pregnancy were not spared" (p. 257). Numerous official reports speak of Germans being attacked by Poles, murdered and beaten, while most of the women were raped. "My father was repeatedly struck on the face and the body with rifle butts, then stabbed with a bayonet. Thereupon my father fell to the ground and as he lay he was shot six times before dying ... [Later] About ten men held me down, by the head, hands and feet while one of them raped me" (Vera Gannott, September, 1939). "Together, they then succeeded in raping my youngest daughter. Thereupon, the two took hold of my eldest daughter and raped her too" (Hedwig Daase). "My husband was shot in the shoulder and hit in the face with a rifle butt. He reeled but still tried to escape. He started to climb the fence, but was held back by a civilian. A polish soldier gave him another rifle-butt blow which knocked him out. A Polish lieutenant led me and the children back in the house. From an attic window I could see my prostrate husband. He lingered on for a long time. I saw him draw his legs up and stretch them; once in a while he would lift his hand. However, it was impossible for us to go to him, for he was surrounded by Polish soldiers and civilians. A Polish policeman stood guard at the fence. Polish women shouted: "The swine is still alive!' Towards evening, my husband was shot three more times by Polish soldiers. He had also been stabbed through the stomach with a bayonet ... The woman next door told me that he was still breathing the next day. My husband was tall and strong and only 38. Probably that is why he had such a hard time dying. He lay about eighteen hours before he was released from his agony" (Christa Gollnick). None of these people had committed any crime. They were murdered by the Communist mobs and the Communist controlled army, simply because they were white Germans. Murders of entire German families and villages were also committed: "The murder of the Beyers, Bromberg gardeners, is characteristic of the cases of innumerable German minority families who, on Bromberg's Bloody Sunday, fell victims to murdering Poles ...The murder is also characteristic of murder gangs recruited from recognized Polish Government Officer Organizations. These groups, acting with recognizable cooperation with the army, were guilty of hundreds of mass murders ... With brutal violence, the railway men tore Kurt Beyer, 11, from the arms of his mother, who was clasping him fearfully ... Stefan Sitarek, a Pole, found the bodies of Friedrich Beyer, his son Heinz, and of Thiede [Beyer's assistant], lying in a heap ... [he] found Kurt Beyer squirming and moaning beneath the dead bodies. Obviously, he was severely injured. Sitarek tried to help the boy, but according to his statement, was rebuffed by the authorities responsible for the transportation of the wounded. According to statements made by other Polish witnesses, the child lying at the side of the bodies of his father and his brother succumbed to his wounds late that morning" (Polish Atrocities, p. 106, 107). Hundreds of stories like this one are recorded and documented, yet very few people have ever heard of these atrocities committed against innocent children and white men and women. Many more cases remain unsolved and hundreds, if not thousands, were reported missing, never to be found or accounted for. Once again, mongrelized governments, where hatred for white people prevailed, are shown to have instituted a bureaucratic, systematic execution of white people. The list of crimes against the White Race goes on and on. Wars instigated and manipulated by Jew mongrels are responsible for the deaths of tens of millions of white soldiers and civilians. These include the American Civil War, World War I, World War II, and numerous smaller wars throughout the world. These numbers of deaths of white men, women, and children are staggering. In the American Civil War, over 600,000 white men died. In World War I, 8.5 million white soldiers and another 10 million white civilians died. In World War II, over 20 million white soldiers and 25 million white civilians died. These are the "official" numbers. The actual numbers of both military and civilian deaths are much higher. But even with these "official" numbers, plus the 45 million white Russians killed by Jewish Communism, we see that the number of whites killed in the last 140 years by Jew-orchestrated wars is well over 100 million. It should be noted that not only is the blood of Jesus Christ and these millions of people on the hands of the Jews, but also the death of their posterity. How many white children would the Beyer family have produced? There will never be another Friedrich Beyer, and his sons, who would have carried on his name and mind, were murdered along with him by mongrels who do not even have the right to life. This is true of tens of millions more white, Christian men whose names have been erased off the face of the planet, and whose names the Jews are attempting to remove from the memories of those white people who remain. The same Jews who proclaim the "never forget" philosophy are attempting to make the few white people who remain forget their white heritage and the Jew-created holocaust of the White Race and cause them to turn against even their own racist grandparents. Many of these 100 million were the most fit and able men of their respective generations who were not given the opportunity to have children of their own. The 20 million white soldiers who died in World War II, had it not been for the war, would have certainly gone on and had children of their own. If we are conservative and estimate that each of these 20 million white soliders had only two children, and that half of those children married each other and had two more children, then instead of 20 million white men being murdered, we are actually talking about 100 million white people who would have lived in the last 50 years. If we make this number 3 children to each family, then we are talking about 170 million, 90 million of whom would be alive today. This number represents just the soldiers who died in World War II. If we do the same math for all those who died in World War II, plus go back another generation for those who died in World War I, and then go back two more generations for those who died in the Civil War, then we get the following results:
White Holocaust Part 4 By Pastor V.S. Herrell From these four sources only, we get a total of 1 billion whites killed, at least 535 million of whom would be alive today (this includes only the last generation, but certainly most of their parents would also be alive). 535 million is about how many white people are on the entire planet today, so that the effect of the above Jewish atrocities is that the white population of the world is half of what it would be today had these actions not taken place. Today, this holocaust continues with the genocide of the White Race by mongrels and blacks, all promoted by the world Zionist coalition. Jews have incited blacks to openly hate and plan the murder of innocent whites. For example, a black college student at Penn State University, a major university, was able to freely write the following for his school newspaper: "After looking at all the evidence there is only one conclusion: white people are devils ... I believe that we must secure our freedom and independence from these devils by any means necessary, including violence ... To protect ourselves we should bear arms (three handguns and two rifles, maybe an M-16) immediately and form a militia ... So black people, let us unite, organize and execute" (African Americans Should Not Trust Devilish White People by Chino Wilson, as published in The Daily Collegian, January 28, 1992). Of course, there was no public outcry regarding this statement, although there is clear and explicit intent to cause people to commit murder. Has the FBI hired paid informants to entrap Mr. Wilson by selling him illegal weapons, or he is allowed to continue his daily activities without interference? Or maybe his activities will one day get him a seat on the Supreme Court in the Clarence Thomas position of the Black Panthers. Where was the media hype when this was printed? How can the Jewish media, which openly preys upon news stories wherein a black or mongrel is murdered by a white (even though the crime was not necessarily racially motivated) justify their silence over such a statement? The fact is that the Jews also desire the death of white people and therefore actively suppress such information to keep it out of the hands of justifiably angry white people. Another instance of Jewish media silence occurred regarding Hulon Mitchell, leader of the so-called black "Yahweh sect." Mitchell repeatedly preached to cult members that whites were devils and must be murdered. He was fond of saying: "All over America, white heads are going to roll!" He then ordered his followers to kill these white people and bring their heads back as trophies. When one follower decided that he would have difficulty carrying the heads of his white victims through downtown Miami, Mitchell settled for an ear. From 1986 to Mitchell's trial in 1992, sect members would do just that - bring the fingers or ears of white victims to prove they were doing what they were told. Is it realistic to believe that such devoted servants have stopped doing that just because Mitchell was found guilty of conspiracy to commit murder? Yet, even though the murders of flagrant, antichrist homosexuals or black drug dealers receive at least two weeks of complete media coverage with regular follow-ups, this story was never big enough to reach the evening news. The statistics prove further that whites are by far the largest victims of racially motivated crimes today. According to the Department of Justice, blacks kill twice as many whites than vice versa. These are only cases where the killer is known, and it is a well-known fact that over 50% of homicide cases go unsolved. Other crimes are no different. Blacks are 20 times more likely to rob a white, and 52 times more likely to commit gang robbery against a white. A black male is 900 times more likely to rape a white woman than a white is to rape a black female. One such woman, raped by a gang of blacks in New York, received much media attention when she was accused of being racist and a white whore for being raped. Blacks openly threatened the judge who provided sentencing against the blacks, and nigger newspapers published her name and broadcast it to all blacks who would like to rape her again. This could have easily been just another rape-murder victim if she had not somehow survived the beating that followed the rape. In short, a black is 103 times more likely to commit any crime against a white than a white against a black. All these statistics are especially startling when one considers the fact that there are 6 white people for every one black and often a Hispanic or Jew who commits a crime is classified as white. Thus, though there are more whites than blacks in the United States, blacks and mongrels commit most of the crimes in the country. (We are also not considering black-on-black crime, wherein most homicides of black males are perpetrated by another black.) Furthermore, in any instance where a white has committed a so-called crime against a black, it is immediately assumed that the crime was racially motivated. This is not so the other way around (assuming the crime even gets any media attention). The following is a news story from Orange County Register, December 11, 1991 (emphasis added): "'Wilding' Attacks: San Diego police are investigating 50 unusually savage assaults that they liken to New York City's notorious 'wilding' attacks, perpetrated by youthful robbers for the sake of committing violence. "Police said the young attackers are black and their victims, 46 men and four women, are white. The victims were attacked in the Hillcrest and North Park neighborhoods. "'There is no evidence they are hate crimes,' Detective Steve Baker said." Obviously, these attacks are hate crimes, as are the other thousands of crimes perpetrated against white people in America. One has to hold a person in contempt or detest that person in order to commit a crime against that person. All black crimes against whites are hate crimes. This is a typical reaction from the Jewish-controlled media, which promote that all whites are racists, while blacks are always the victims. In fact, the statistics point the other way. Any attack on a white person is a hate crime, as the hatred of white people is promoted at every opportunity. In fact, most blacks have an ingrained feeling of hatred of whites, and they believe that drugs and diseases like AIDS were created by white people to destroy blacks. Advocators of such beliefs include Spike Lee, Bill Cosby, and Jesse Jackson. Most blacks in general believe such nonsense. Another heinous hate crime against whites is perpetrated by the United States' legal system, wherein predominantly black juries have often set free black criminals in the face of overwhelming prosecutorial evidence. Yet, white jurors rarely pass judgments based on race and do not typically set free criminals just because they are white. (Although non-black jurors have been browbeaten by the threat of race riots or murder to vote not guilty and set free nigger criminals.) These hate crimes are but another part of the plan for the genocide of the White Race. More insidious criminal acts against whites include open discrimination against whites who apply for jobs. Jews cry for so-called diversity in the workforce, in the schoolplace, and in all aspects of society, while qualified whites lose their jobs to inferior negroes. Every time a white man loses his job because of so-called affirmative action or the desire for so-called "diversity", the mongrels are stealing bread from his family, thus perpetuating the holocaust of the White Race. This is observed also in acceptance rates at universities and schools across America, where the standards have been lowered to ridiculously low or non-existent levels so that retarded blacks and other mongrels (many of whom who are not even citizens of this country) can gain entry to the school or be awarded coveted scholarships, which really belong to the hard-working, highly qualified whites. These white people are then either forced to quit school or work full-time jobs in order to pay tuition. Others must delay completing their degree in order to work two full jobs to support themselves and their families. These and many more atrocities are fully documented in Jared Taylor's book Paved With Good Intentions: The Failure of Race Relations in Contemporary America. For more information, contact: Christian Separatist Church Society P.O. Box 188, Kodak, TN 37764
Racial Socialism Nature's Eternal Religion, Chapter 6 of BookII - The Salvation by our founder, Ben Klassen In his frantic, unending endeavor to blunt and stifle the healthy, natural instincts of the White Man, the Jew has worked feverishly to confuse us on those prime issues that are vital for our survival. In this category I have already mentioned the havoc he has wrought relative to our ideas about racial loyalty and also our religious orientation. One other basic idea that the White Man is hopelessly confused about is socialism or collectivism, and I use these words interchangeably. Since this idea has been so terribly abused and confused by the Jews, the Communists and the Kosher Konservatives to the point where they could mean anything, I am going to set forth the position and meaning that the World Church of the Creator gives to the temm socialism: to us socialism means Organized Society, period. It does not at all imply state ownership of the means of production, nor does it, in our definition, imply confiscation of private property. On the contrary. Let us make it crystal clear: we, of the World Church of the Creator are opposed to state ownership of the basic means of production, such as farms, factories, stores, etc. We are for the ownership of private property by individuals. We believe that there is a category of functions that are best performed by organized society as a whole. In this category we place highways, airports, harbors, national defense, law enforcement and many others. We are in fact not particularly interested in all the dogmatic political terms with which the White Race has been tearing itself apart in arguing the theoretical aspects of each. We are not interested in making a holy cow out of "private enterprise" or "capitalism." Nor are we dogmatically concerned about defending to our dying breath, the much bally-hooed idea of a "republican" form of goverment that the Kosher Konservatives are so enchanted about. All these terms are, at best, theoretical. What we are really concerned about is: what is the most practical and viable type of organized society for the White Man to live in? We come back to that foundation of our religious creed: What is best for the White Race? In examining the hackneyed political ideas held so dear by the Kosher Konservatives, we find they do not hold up under this basic guide: What is best for the White Race? The idea of a "republic" has broken down before our very eyes in the last two centuries. It was already discarded by the Romans before the first century A.D. It has been an excellent vehicle which the Jews have used to fleece, rob and destroy the White Race. The Kosher Konservatives will argue that it has been converted to "democracy" and it is democracy that is our overwhelming problem. This is, at most, a half truth. The difference between "democracy" and "republic" is only a matter of semantics. In practical application they both lead to mob rule, to a type of government where the scum elements govern the better elements of the people, with the parasites multiplying and destroying the productive elements. The essence of democracy (or republicanism) is the two (or more) party system, parties which are always in opposition to each other. This is the Jewish tool of divide and conquer. In practice this means that no matter how clear and urgent the problems, the approach is: division and opposition. Then, after prolonged hassle, no matter what compromised decision is "voted" on, there is an opposing group, hampering, blocking and scuttling the course of action. The average participant in a democracy has no more understanding of the thousands of complex problems of the affairs of state that the average passenger has in the intricacies of flying the huge jumbo jet which is being piloted by a trained professional. Without a comprehensive knowledge of the problems he is voting on his vote is less than useless, it is dangerous. We of the World Church of the Creator believe, not in democracy, but in Racial Socialism, which is teamwork elevated to its highest perfection for the welfare of the whole race, led by its ablest leaders. It combines the best elements of both team-work and competition. If "team spirit" and rooting for the "home team" are such noble attributes (and they are) then, certainly, having a whole race united in a team effort for their common good is the highest goal we can strive for. That is what we mean by Racial Socialism as the ultimate in organized society for the White Race. Let us now also take a look at the term "individual enterprise." It, too, is a theoretical myth and a deceptive fraud. Anyone who has ever played the parlor game "Monopoly" knows what the end result of wide open free enterprise is: before the game is over, one party gains a powerful stranglehold over all the rest, and from then on out, no matter which way the dice roll, when the game is over, he owns everything - houses, land, factories, banks. This, too, happens in real life. It is easily discernable that, say Standard Oil, let free to play the rules of the game proudly known as "free enterprise" could from the beginning, have driven every other company out of the oil business and acquired the oil business in totality. It could easily have acquired a total monopoly in worldwide oil. It could have owned every service station and gas station in the world through squeeze-play and financial strength. It could have then moved into the banking business until it acquired every bank in the country. Left unchecked, it then could have started acquiring manufacturing businesses such as the electrical industries, etc. As its financial powers snowballed, it could then easily have taken over the railroads, real estate, etc., until, in fact, one company owned everything and held every individual at their mercy. This is "free enterprise" in clear essence, the same "free enterprise" that the Kosher Konservatives just love to prattle about. Basically this is what has happened on a world-wide basis. Only instead of Standard Oil, it is the Jewish House of Rothschild and the world-wide Jewish banking conspiracy that has a stranglehold on the world. They not only own practically all the physical and financial wealth of the world, but they also own all the governments of the world. Throughout this book we have referred to this clique as the Jewish conspiracy. Actually it encompasses the whole Jewish race, practicing their religious creed, the Talmud. It is therefore our conclusion from the lessons of history that neither a "republican" form of government, nor "free enterprise" nor our much vaunted Constitution is going to save the White Race from mongrelization and destruction. In order to survive and expand, the White Race must (a) unite, (b) organize, (c) practice racial loyalty, (d) have a religious creed encompassing these same aspects. Since I have already defined socialism as organized society, it is obvious that to be organized at all the White Man must have a socialist government, which every government has been from time immemorial, in any case. What the White Man must further have is Racial Socialism, that is a government organized with the prime goal of promoting the best interests of the White Race and the White Race alone. It must be based on a racial foundation. In essence, we, of the World Church of the Creator, believe in a harmonized blending of our Church and our State. We believe our White Society is best served by that combination whereby a race's government and religion blend together in perfect harmony to promote the best interests of our White Race. We believe that "separation of church and state," that much vaunted holy cow in our constitution, is a deceptive fraud and a hoax. One might well ask - how can the same people that go to church and preach "resist not evil," and "turn the other cheek" support a government with huge tax contributions for national defense, and for an ever increasing police forces? It just doesn't make sense. Either you believe in defending yourself, or you don't. How can the same people that spend over a hundred billion dollars a year to presumably have the government defend them from their enemies then go to church and preach "love your enemies?" It is utterly ridiculous. It requires a split personality, a schizophrenic personality to ride on both sides of the fence. Nor is there any great virtue in having the White people split up and fragmented into a thousand divergent religious camps, each in disagreement with each other, often culminating in religious wars and fratricide, as in Ireland today, and hundreds of religious wars in previous centuries. We, of the World Church of the Creator, are pursuing the goal of uniting the White Race on the obvious ground that is basic to all, namely - what is best for the White Race - as our cardinal dogma. We are further bent on harmonizing the goals, objectives and the philosophy of our government with that of our religious thinking. To have these two major forces of our society pulling in opposite directions is sheer idiocy. We believe in an organized social structure; we believe in a religion that has as its basic foundation the best interests of the White Race; we believe in the total White Race being united in such a religion, rather than fragmented into a thousand conflicting and suicidal Christian creeds; we believe that the govemment should harmonize with our religious creed and also be based on the same racial foundation. We furthermore believe that such government and such organized society functions best if it is further based on the Leadership Principle. We call this Racial Socialism. In order to understand the term socialism we must first of all brush away all the deceptive ideas about this word that have been flooded upon us by the Jews, the Communists and the Kosher Konservatives. Socialism is not an evil concept as the Kosher Konservatives would have us believe. In essence it means organized society, striving to promote its own best interests collectively. Not only is there nothing wrong with this, but it is the only way civilized man has been able to survive and advance. Outside of an organized socialist framework, we would not be able to own or protect our property, have highways, form a government, have schools, churches, defense organizations and a hundred other basic requirements. We are all dependent on each other's contributions towards the social structure. We are dependent on thousands of different industries for our existence - railroads, power companies, manufacturing plants, farming, etc. We need the accumulative help of millions of other people to live in today's highly specialized society. This is what has produced our great civilization, and let me emphasize that we, of the World Church of the Creator are not anti-civilization. We are for civilization, the White Man's civilization. The fact of the matter is that man is a social creature and like many other species in Nature, he owes his very existence, and in fact his tremendous progress, to the fact that he has been able to organize collectively, that he has been able to so effectively organize a workable society. Socialism is organized society. He has been doing this for so long that it has become deeply ingrained in his instinct by now and he does it intuitively. If it were not for this characteristic of man, he would still be back in the caveman stage of a million years ago where each individual would hump and scrounge for food on his own and live like the present aborigines of central Australia. Even these lowly people have some semblance of social organization. It was as man began to form and organize a social structure, and organize, divide and specialize in the work and labor that had to be done, that he began his long climb upwards into the higher civilized levels. It was when one man became a shoemaker, another man a tailor, another a farmer, another a schoolteacher, etc., that man began to pull himself up by the bootstraps and become part of the tremendously productive "socialized" society that he is today. Without this division of labor and specialization he would be back at the level of the aborigines we mentioned earlier. Not only that, but man has a definite spiritual need to belong to his tribe or his group or to identify with his own kind of people, which for the White Man is his own White Race. When the naive conservatives tell you that Collectivism or Socialism is a terrible evil, and that Russia is in the grip of Socialism, they are lying through their teeth. Russia is not at all a Collectivist nation as such. Russia is a vast super slave-state under the heel of a tyrannical Jewish dictatorship, the most cruel and hideous that the world has ever seen. A collectivist society is a natural society whereby the natural leaders of the people are just that - natural leaders, leading their people in an organized fashion for their own constructive improvement, not alien slave-masters who have subjugated another race in order to disintegrate and destroy them. A true and outstanding example of natural leadership and a natural order was the wonderful society in Nazi Germany during the 30's under their natural leader, namely Adolf Hitler. There we had an example of a true German leading his own people, the Germans, and being admired and obeyed by millions of devoted followers. This was one of the finest examples of a people operating under the natural order that Nature has instinctively imbedded in their innermost being, and thereby achieving their full potential in productivity, creativity and racial unity. It is this natural order that brings out the best in a race, and promotes its well-being and eternal urge to advance towards a higher level of existence. It was a fine and wonderful renaissance of the White Race at its best. It is one of the great tragedies of history that the Jew in control of the overwhelming majority of the rest of the White world was able to smash this outburst of its own realization by the White Race. In Hitler's Nazi Germany, the individual German owned more private property than he ever did under the democracy of the Weimar Republic. He had more hope, more individual freedom, more opportunities, a higher standard of living. He lived a much happier and a much more constructive life than he did under the Jewish "democracy" of the 1920's, or any other period. We have already noted earlier in this book particularly in the first chapter, that many species in Nature are social creatures, that is, they live in an organized society. We have observed especially how the bees have a tightly knit and highly organized social structure within which they live. Every bee knows exactly what his function is, they do their job instinctively and their every act helps the colony as a whole. By building the colony and living within it, the bee is able to survive and perpetuate his species. The same honey bee that lives in this type of social structure is by Nature committed to that kind of existence. He can not do otherwise. If he tried to live as an individual he would die and his species would perish with him. At this stage of the White Man's evolution, he is in the same position as the organized social-living honey bee. The White Man's natural mode of living is as a member of the tribe, as a member of his larger social group. Were he to live outside of it and live as an individual, again, his society would break down and undoubtedly his race would perish. I repeat, the White Race, having reached the height of excellence that it has, is a highly complex socialized creature whose very inner soul is intertwined in his social structure, in community with the other members of his race. Like the honey bee, Nature has programmed into his very instinct a certain type of society that he fits into and that he must naturally have in order to survive. Basically this developed from the earlier tribes and grew from there towards higher levels of society which perhaps reached its highest point and culmination in Hitler's National Socialist Germany. It is our purpose to advance further from this high point in the White Man's development. This natural order has certain inherent characteristics. The first characteristic is racial loyalty - loyalty towards your own people. Nature has endowed each of us with this characteristic instinctively - the urge to keep our race pure. This means that we have a love for our own kind and we have a fierce hostility towards those that would intrude amongst us and endanger our race. Instinctively built into such a social structure, is a high respect for womanhood and the protection of its women. The natural instinct for keeping the race pure incites a fighting hatred in the male to prevent his women from being polluted by males of another race. Not too long ago, if a black nigger raped a White woman, justice was swift and final. He was usually hanged from the nearest tree. We, of the World Church of the Creator, firmly believe in the concept of private property and believe that the finest example of a Socialistic White society up to this time was demonstrated by Hitler's National Socialist Gemmany (which protected private property). Nevertheless, we can demonstrate that even in a society where all property is communally owned, if free from Jewish pollution, it not only can survive very nicely, but can do very well in terms of taking care of its own people and expanding the White Race. We have an example of such in our very own continent as is dramatically demonstrated by a people called the Hutterites. The Hutterites live in "colonies" of about 70 to 130 souls. There is no private property. All their property is communally owned. These people have a rather interesting and colorful history. Originating in Moravia in 1528, its members took their name from Jacob Hutter, an early leader, who was bumed at the stake by the kind and loving Christian church in 1536. By the end of the 16th century the Hutterites numbered about 20,000 souls. They had certain weaknesses which they still have to this day and it was their weakness of pacifism and disinterest in politics that soon threatened their existence. As pacifists and non-combatants, the Hutterites were victimized by the armies of both sides in the war between Austria and Turkey in 1593. They were plundered, taken captive and many were executed. By 1622 all Hutterites had been driven from Moravia. After several other wanderings they received an invitation from the government of Russia in 1770. This was accepted by 123 members, who then moved to that undeveloped area to pioneer the farmlands of the Ukraine. This group prospered beautifully for 100 years, until in 1874 they were deprived of military exemption. Once again they felt forced to pack up and leave. This time the entire population, about 800 souls, decided to try again. This time they left for America. They moved to South Dakota. There, due to the difficulties in obtaining the large tracts of land that they needed, and the easy availability of homesteading for individuals, about half of them abandoned colony life and took up homesteads. The remaining faithful founded three colonies between 1874 and 1877. These three colonies carved civilization from out of the frontier lands, spawned the some 200 colonies that exist today in some of the Western states and western provinces of Canada. Today these 200 colonies constitute approximately 20,000 members of the Hutterite people. It is most remarkable to note that the original three colonies, numbering only 400 souls, has now expanded and multiplied to over 20,000 members. This despite the fact that the Hutterites practically never recruit new members from the outside. This 20,000 figure is completely due to natural reproduction of their own kind. This means that this fine group of White people have multiplied 50 times their own number within one century. In studying the life of the Hutterites we find that they live in communal colonies. Each colony grows to a number of about 130 before they divide and form a new colony, a process not unsimilar to the swarming bee-hive colonies. Since they do not believe in private property as such, all property is owned by the colony itself. They solely engage in agriculture. This usually comprises a large tract of land which might be either farming or ranching property. They have communal buildings and they all eat together in one large dining room. They are quite religious and each colony has their own preacher. Each colony also has their own natural leader who supervises and directs the labor and the business of the group as a whole. Each man is assigned his special job and he performs it quite well. Regardless of what kind of job he has, his job is regarded with equal respect and of equal importance to any other. Nobody is paid any wages, but everyone is properly taken care of in all respects. Anyone is free to leave and divest himself from the colony at any time, but hardly anyone ever does. The members seem happy, healthy and prosperous. Undoubtedly they are as happy, and probably better adjusted to their group and fellow members, and have a better sense of belonging, than does the average American. Although I would personally not like to live in such a colony, probably because I wasn't brought up that way, and also because I believe in private property, nevertheless, here we have overwhelming evidence that not only can a society that practices communal property ownership survive, but it can flourish and prosper, provided it is not contaminated by Jewish control or interference. This should refute the claim of Kosher Konservatives, once and for all, that it is "socialism" that is the culprit. The other most interesting aspect of the Hutterite way of living is the observation that in less than a century they have multiplied to 50 times their original numbers. This is most remarkable indeed and it is due, of course, to the fact that they are prolific and raise large families. It is also most noteworthy that despite the fact that they often raise families of twelve, they are quite capable of feeding, clothing and maintaining this prolific rate of expansion from one generation to the next without having lowered their living standards or the quality of their fine race. The Hutterites do remarkably well that which Nature has ordained us all to do - to raise a beautiful family of children. They have been most successful in expanding the White Race and populating the land with their own kind. I might add that "their own kind" exemplifies some of the best characteristics of the White Race, intellectually, morally, physically and aesthetically. They prove that the White Race, too, can be as fruitful and prolific as any other. Our conclusions on Racial Socialism are summed up with the following observations: The White Race thrives best in an organized society which is socialism. The White Race cannot survive otherwise. The White Man has an inborn natural order that he fits into. The key to such a society is the Leadership Principle. Private property rights are not in conflict with Racial Socialism but an integral part of it. Only through an organized society can an individual adequately protect his property. The White Man thrives ideally under a socialist government, provided he maintains control of his own destiny and protects himself from the destructive intrusion of the Jew. The ideal situation is that combination whereby the religion and the government of a race blend together in perfect harmony to promote the best interests of the race. Keeping the Jew out and keeping the race pure can best be accomplished by having a social structure whose foundation is race. HAIL KLASSEN!
A Revolution of the Soul By N.B. Forrest The America of 1992 is not the country I was born in. It is not the country my father fought two wars for or the country that my ancestors fought a civil war to try to preserve as a constitutional state, founded so the blood of their blood would always be able to call it their homeland. No, America is not now the country that 300 years of sweat, tears and blood created. It is changed. It is now something I do not know and cannot call my own. Like my fellow countrymen, I now walk through a land filled with strangers and ruled by people who, if they ever were Americans, have lost all claim to that once great title. It is true that the tanks and armed soldiers of an African dictatorship do not yet own our streets. But wait until the first true ripples of revolt spread across this land. Then you will see the tanks. The American dictatorship is less crude, but infinitely crueler, more dangerous and more powerful. Already it has wrought fearful havoc among our people, who wander about confused and bewildered, angry, bitter, cynical and despairing, as television spews forth a mountain of lies so ridiculous that one might think that the whole thing was a joke, if the reality was not so grim. We are living a grotesque sitcom called the United States of America. Is there any use fighting it, this monster that has consumed our homeland? Are we doomed to a life of watching everything our ancestors built torn to pieces, stolen by the alien hands and twisted into a ghastly mockery of what it was supposed to be? Are we bound inextricably to affirmative action, to the oppressiveness of the Chosen, who circle above and permeate our culture like a buzzard; to illegal immigration, which floods our cities and makes our children strangers in theit own land; to an, economy ruled by smirking thieves and conmen, while hordes of decent, hard-working men and women go without a job, without even the hope of a job? Are we to be the pathetic toys of clown politicians, huckster clergymen, cardboard generals, strutting criminals, whole classes and races of vagabonds and beggars, George Will and William F. Buckley, Maplethorpe and Marilow, Bush and Barney Frank, Marion Barry and Sephen Solarz, the multiethnic and multicultual Rainbow Coalition, the I Have a Dream demagogues and welfare checks? Crack Kills and so do cruise missiles aimed at Baghdad, though you wouldn't know it from what the boys at the Pentagon say. It's a wunnerful life. But it is still my life and my land and I will never give an inch. The revolution has started, in my soul. We can't run away from this. There is no running off to a desert island or retreating to a cabin in the Rockies. This revolution has to be fought out here. Do you think you can sit it out? Do you think you can play the role of a trimmer, lie low and hope the storm passes? Do you really think you can "rise above it"? Scorn it all? Or give up without firing a shot? Sorry, but whether you like it or not, you are in this fight up to your eyeballs. There will be no sitting on the sidelines. Sure, you will be able to play 'Let's Pretend" for a while yet, but you will pay a high price for fencesitting. Every Majority American must understand that he is in a life and death struggle. Either we will seize contol of the situation and do what is necessary to reverse the course of events, or our people will vanish from the face of the earth--and they will deserve to. Life and survival are only granted to those who fight for it. That the "meek will inherit the earth" is pure eyewash. The revolution must start in our souls, our hearts and our minds. This is not the moment to strike a blow against the empire. But it is certainly time to start building an inner fortress that will stand firm against the trials to come. It is not enough to mumble about what is wrong with the country or shake your head with disgust at the scenes around you. The first step is to accept one simple fact: the U.S., as it is constituted and governed today, is no longer our country. The forms may remain, but the spirit has flown. You will find no justice in the courts. The laws have been perverten and do violence to our ancient codes, handed down for a thousand years. This country's relations with its neighbors are shameless and shameful; blustering threats or cringing obsequiousness depending on whether the object of the nation's attention is a backward and incompetent desert land populated by people of whom we know nothing, or a vicious little racial state plunked down in the middle of a sea of hostile natives, the inhabitants of which we know all too well. If you are a Majority American and believe that this land is still your land, you are non compos mentis. It will not be your land again without a terrible amount of sacrifice and struggle. Get it into your head that you have no country, that your homeland is currently in the hands of your mortal enemies and traitors. Once you accept the truth, that you are living in an occupied land, everything will be much clearer. Once you accept the real situation, it takes much of the sting away. The various ethnic groups which have invaded the country are openly trying to tear it to pieces. You just can't understand how "Americans" could do this. When you come to realize that these people are not Americans, you will begin to understand why they act the way they do. It is natural for foreign enemies to act like foreign enemies. Remember the warning, "All enemies, foreign and domes- tic," in the Constitution? Tom Harkin, George Will, Edwin Edwards. These are domestic enemies. Howard Metzenbaum, Yitzhak Shamir and that Mexican illegal who just took away your job at the construction site. They are foreign enemies. Expect them to act out their hostility and you will not he disappointed. Remember, being born within the physical confines of the U.S. does not make you an American. Would the Hindus have called an English child born in India during the Raj an Indian? If they had, the child's father would have given them the point of his sword. A person can acquire another country, but it is a process of the heart and soul, and the chromosomes cannot clash too greatly with those of the true sons of the soil. Once you have adopted the view that you are living in enemy- occupied territory, you will find every outrage easier to bear. Lies coming out of the radio and television? NO surprise. Insane laws, depriving you of your rights and robbing our children of their birthright? Only to be expected. Noisome filth dressed in expensive suits sitting in the legislature of what was once your country? Why not? Somebody has to run a conquered territory. Having passed the stage of thinking that a new team of court jesters and professor buffoons can resurrect a corpse, you will begin to think about what we really have to do. This is where the passive resistance and the walling off of the system comes in. You stop wasting time waiting for "them" to do something, for a new crop of lawyer-politicians to betray their very nature and actually do something noble and worthwhile. You stop listening to the twaddle coming out of the tube. In no time the announcers spouting out the controlled news start to look like (and sound like) deranged robots. You wonder how you ever paid any attention to them. You read newspapers only to keep up with world news, to ensure that, if Califomia falls off into the Pacific, you will not go uninformed. You will withdraw from all activities that put you in contact with the enemy. Why spend time with them for any reason? If you cannot avoid some connection with them you limit yourself to going through the motions. Many will consider such tactics, if they can be called that, useless. If you hunger for drama and immediate change, then these critics have a point. And I would never suggest that we do nothing positive and direct. To be sure, when the opportunities present themselves, you should seize them (such as the chance to vote for a pro-Majority political candidate, a luxury few of us enjoy). Others will say that it seems that all of our publications and efforts at spreading our message are useless that we are only talking to ourselves. The fact is that our message is being spread into every corner of the country every day. We don't know for sure how many enlightened people there are, that is true. But never assume that even the most modest efforts are without value. Throw a rock or a pebble into a pond and watch the ripples spread. It is the same with our message. You may leave literature on an airport bench. It may be picked up and thrown in the trash. Or it may be picked up by a man of wealth and power who for the first time is exposed to a different point of view--and decides to take action. Each one of us must go through this revolution of the soul. It is a long journey. Many have already successfully completed it. Join them!
In Defense of the White Race by Rev. Matt Hayhow Every White Racial Loyalist group has adherents who believe guerrilla war/terrorist actions are the way to pursue White Victory. Even our Founder, Ben Klassen, predicted such action might become necessary before all was said and done. The lessons of history and the current state of our people undoubtedly support this belief. Yet, such a significant decision--adopting armed resistance against the J.O.G.--cannot be based on emotion, "heroic" fantasies or youthful impatience. Instead, it should be as a result of necessity and strategic planning. As the great German military theorist Clausewitz once said, "War is a continuation (my emphasis) of policy by other means." Violence is the last resort. We can't honestly or logically reach the conclusion that the time for organized violence is now, when no past pro-White group has ever had a sound program for our people nor ever adequately spread the word to our White Racial Comrades. In the past, White Loyalists have half-heartedly "preached to the choir", jumped like rats from sinking ship to sinking ship and taken no for an answer (to use a few cliches!). Part of the problem was no serious and fully explained program existed--when the going got hot, pro-White activists had no moral foundation to support them and urge them on through the trials and tribulations. Another contributor to this history of chaos, fratricidal warfare and ineffectiveness was the overweening hubris of slimy and ambitious publisher-"leaders". Their sole concern has been, not White survival, but personal power. Both of these factors have resulted in "leaders" guided by the whims of their members, and members like spoiled children who "take their balls and go home" at the first sign of discipline or hard work. These "leaders" compete with each other for the few shekels they can squeeze from the miserly "pro-White" ship-jumpers by telling them what they want to hear, instead of what is truly needed for the Survival, Expansion, and Advancement of Nature's Finest Creation. This "democratic" toadying to flighty mugwumps has hamstrung efforts to successfully spread our Ideals and made it seem as if it's impossible to awaken our White Racial Comrades. We Creators do not accept any theory as a "given." We should not believe that, "We've tried to awaken our people for 50 years and it hasn't worked, so terrorism is the only answer," for in truth, no one really has tried. Until Creativity, no Racial Idea or party has been wholly based on the realities of the world, has totally reevaluated White Values, nor, most significantly, energetically propagandized the millions of our White Racial Comrades who are barely familiar with our motives and goals. Only Creativity attacks the root causes of our people's, our society's, and our world's deterioration, and only Creativity has a solid program of propagandizing, proselytizing, and organizing, of putting ten million White Man's Bibles into the hands of our White Racial Comrades to build the foundation for a Whiter and Brighter World! These reasons, among others, make an offensive strategy of violent, armed resistance to the Jewish Occupation Government (J.O.G.) premature. Once we have made every effort to awaken our White Racial Comrades and all means for legal ideological resistance to the Jewish vomit spewed by the media, government, and churches are denied us--then will come the time to "continue our policy by other means," but surrendering the battle for the minds of our people before it's hardly begun is no way to prove the truth and merit of our Creed or our own ability to lead our people to a White Heaven on Earth. Our strategy is to first win the propaganda war. That can be done with a combination of offensive and defensive tactics. Attack the lies, misconceptions, and propaganda which cloud White minds while building and maintaining a firm and resilient physical/moral defense against the counterattacks we are bound to encounter. For, as Creativity gains acceptance, we can expect Morris Dees, dirty Harry Covington, and other minions of the J.O.G. to do their utmost to eliminate the threat to their continued hegemony. So what can we do to forward Creativity and protect our Church from the quasi-legal and downright illegal attacks of our foes until we have either won the hearts and minds of our White Racial Comrades or are forced to resort to Nature's Highest Law, the Law of Survival? We need only look to history and the principles of Creativityfor the perfect tactics. "Fortune favors the prepared mind." -Louis Pasteur. Such disparate groups as scientists, priests, soldiers, and the Boy Scouts study and train to prepare for their futures. Even animals are taught to defend, hunt, etc. by their parents. It is important for The World Church of the Creator and we Creators to prepare for ours. Part of this preparation is to be ready for probable future obstacles. Judging from our past and the past experiences of groups such as the Ku Klux Klan, the American Nazi Party, and Hitler's National Socialists, we can expect to face slander, physical attacks, and "legal" assaults. The slander will come from the media and other J.O.G. minions, from FBI infiltration-agitation campaigns, and even from envious racial "allies." Physical attacks are likely to be formented by Jews and carried out by gangs (SHARP, muds, the JDL, etc.). We can also expect civil suits by men like Morris Dees and criminal cases against Creators by the Jewstice Dept.--usually based on the efforts of agent-provocateurs, the lies of traitors and/or the "cooperation" of the fearful. These are by no means the only impediments we face in our quest to build a Whiter and Brighter World for our people. We will most defInitely confront poisoned and obstinate minds, the masses destruction program of the media, and the suicidal prattle of Christians, but these obstructions can and will be overcome by assiduously promoting our Creed to our racial kin. This offense-oriented plan of The World Church of the Creator has already been well-explained and illustrated by our Founder Ben Klassen, P.M. Matt Hale, and many other Creators. In the battle for the minds of our people, we are on the offensive, and this will be the cause of the attacks described above. From its past record, we know the J.O.G. will try to destroy any menace to its power before it becomes a serious threat. As a result, our program is to construct a solid organizational foundation so we may continue our propagandizing, proselytizing, and organizing with little or no interruption when the J.O.G. turns from its dismantling of the Militia and Identity "movements" and focuses on us. Creativity is already better prepared to meet our enemies than any pro-White organization before. It has a sound ideology based on our Three Basic Books. This has already enabled us to do something very few have been able to accomplish--to survive the death of our Founder, agent-provocateurs, Morris Dees, and treachery at the top. If we look deeper into the writings of Ben Klassen and other Creators, we will find further plans for a steadfast defense from the malignant forces of the J.O.G. Let's review five of these strategies in order to prepare ourselves and The World Church of the Creator--the only realistic hope for the Survival, Expansion, and Advancement of the White Race. l) A Solid Foundation. Creativity is a way of life based on the Laws of Nature, the Lessons of History, and Logic and Common Sense. There is no compromising these facts of life. Creativity, unlike Christianity, is not open to distortion or argument, and is clearly elucidated in our many books. Christianity's contradictory and nebulous Bible, on the other hand, allows different people(s) to interpret its teachings in myriad ways (usually the easy way). It is impossible to rely on such a vacillating moral foundation. Contrarily, Creativity's well-defined stand for the White Race and basis in reality made possible our rapid reformation and election of a new Pontifex Maximus after the tribulations of the early '90s. Easterners and Westerners; urbanites and the rural born; skinheads, collegians, and our elders all overcame hubris and dissension because they had a distinct program and concrete system of values to rally around. Our Holy Creed is the primary bulwark against J.O.G. aggression, but walls alone do not make a home--it also takes the labor of energetic and able craftsmen. 2) Propagandizing, Proselytizing, and Organizing. Creativity's program of propagandizing, proselytizing, and organizing was--and still is--a large contributing factor to the sorvival and growth of the World Church of the Creator. P.M. Klassen's tactic of copiously distributing our literature and "Brain Bombs" (our Books) worked well. To this day, folks who found a discarded White Man's Bible or were handed a Nature's Eternal Religion years ago are coming forward to work with us. Our continuing missionary-like efforts, though they may seem less glorious than gun battles, are the true guarantor of White Victory. The wider our dissemination of Creative Ideals, the harder it is for J.O.G. thought-police to erase them. 3) Polarization and Dispersion. The third aspect of our defense, too, has been written of by our Founder. Before his passing, P.M. Klassen not only foresaw the need to polarize people around one concrete and all-encompassing belief, but also to disperse Creativity's adherents and resources. Polarization and Dispersion is partially explained in #1 above and fully elucidated throughout our books. Dispersion of our leaders, members and resources, all polarized around Creativity, makes the J.O.G.'s efforts to thwart us difficult, if not impossible. Take out the P.M. and he is replaced by another. Destroy a church group and the fight goes on. 4) The Leadership Principle and Primary Groups. Another facet of our defense is Creativity's recognition and support for men and women of ability--The Leadership Principle. It is a basic principle of Nature and Nature's Eternal Religion that the best lead. Free-lance leaders, like those encouraged by Beam's "Leaderless Resistance," can make gains, but that is the exception rather than the rule. The program of The World Church of the Creator, on the contrary, is Leaderful Resistance, ala the Primary Group System. In our case, it is more small church groups than actual primary groups, but the benefits and results are similar, and as these church groups grow it is a small thing to, if needed, break them into the more facile work groups proposed by Rev. Wolf. In the Primary Group System, a leader starts small and, as he gains experience and hones his abilities, rises to more responsibility. He is focused by the directives of the experienced leaders above and so is not continually repeating the mistakes committed by those who have gone before, as so often happens in the "Leaderless Resistance" "cells." A further benefit of the Primary Group-type organization is its training of men and women to become effective leaders. This ensures a large pool of capable stewards from which to pick should any fall prey to J.O.G. attacks, but most importantly, all of this means a church group's victories, large or small, are not isolated incidents--they are part of an organized and orchestrated campaign for the noblest of goals--the Survival, Expansion, and Advancement of our precious White Race. They are not flashes in a pan, but the first flicker in the dark night heralding the rise of the Creative Phoenix. 5) Tenacious Loyalty and Iron Determination. The final defenses against our enemies, the ones which drive men like Morris Dees and Harold Covington to fits of impotent rage and support every form of resistance above, are tenacious loyalty and iron determination. Our religion, Creativity, is not just some political lip-service or stop-gap solution, but our lives and the lives of our children. It is the embodiment of our White Racial instincts and the result of thousands of years of learning. It is the manifestation of our natural drive to survive. Such an elemental desire fittingly results in a fanatical zeal and a rock-solid loyalty to the instrument of White salvation: Creativity and The World Church of the Creator. These two traits are alien to our opposites. Creativity is a religion unlike anyother. It is a Promethean Creed--an ideology of forethought Our strategy for defense, like Salubrious Living, is based on prevention. In Salubrious Living, we eat well and exercise to enable our bodies to combat disease and to prevent sickness from getting a hold of us. With a Creative defensive strategy, we protect our Church and our Race from the poison of Jewish influence by making them strong enough to resist. We take constructive action and learn and prepare in order to limit the harmful effects of the physical and mental impediments we are bound to encounter as we grow, the same as the wolfpup is prepared for life by the "teachings" and training of older wolves, his own efforts and experiences, and his natural instincts. One final point. The World Church of the Creator's long-term goal is the Survival, Expansion, and Advancement of the White Race, and I do mean long-term. The Revolution of Values will not happen overnight. No revolution ever has. Rushing out to confront the Beast eagerly but ill-prepared is not effective or productive. Believe me, I know. Channel your zeal into constructive pursuits such as increased propagandizing, physical training, or courses in marketing, desk-top publishing, or anything you can learn to benefit yourself and in turn, the White Race. Short-term goals are like the steps on a ladder-keep on completing every step and soon you'll have reached the top. There is no limit to how high you and we can go. RAHOWA! From P.M. Hale... Brother Matt Hayhow is to be commended on another excellent article demonstrating his profound insights into what it will take to win our Holy Struggle. As much as I enjoy and approve all articles written by our Creators in The Struggle and all articles printed in The Struggle are in complete accordance with our Creed, Brother Hayhow's articles particularly impress me for their logic, clarity, and devotion. RAHOWA!
LET US HAVE UNBRIDLED ENTHUSIASM by Reverend Matt Hale, Pontifex Maximus As Creators, being imbued with the life-affirming religion of Creativity, we are positive people, We are not weighed down by negative thinking and self-doubt, We know that there is no limit to what we can accomplish and as a result of our enthusiasm and dedication, we shall guarantee the future of our Race. As Ben Klassen pointed out, one of the most effective strategies with which one group can defeat its opponents is to convince the opponents that they are defeated before the battle even begins. The Jews have utilized this strategy to the hilt, convincing many of our Race through the media, government, and educational establishment that there is "nothing we can do." In reality, the battle has hardly even begun, and not only is there not "nothing" we can do, there is plenty we can do if we are ready and willing to completely liberate our thinking from the influence of the Jews. We must refuse to look at life in an "orthodox" way, for this "orthodox" way has been chosen for us by our enemies. For example, we do not view the "perfect" evening as drinking beer and watching a football game and nor do we view life as getting up, going to work, eating, and going to bed. We view our purpose in life as providing for our families, providing for our Race, and providing for ourselves. It is by this that we fulfill the mission assigned to us by Nature as assigned to all other creatures on Earth. By the same token, our enthusiasm for Creativity and our religious crusade must not be tempered by what others consider "normal." Our enthusiasm must have no bounds. We must not be restrained by what others not imbueed with Creativity would be restrained. For example, when someone says to us, "but don't you fear losing your job?," we should say, "but don't you fear losing your White Race?," and make sure that they understand that lost jobs can be recovered, but a lost Race never. We take a positive approach--that though on occasion we may lose our jobs, we will find another one, and we will not be stopped from doing our part to save our White Race. We must go beyond what others, even others in the White Movement, would consider acceptable. When other racialists pat themselves on the back for passing out a few fliers, we must push ourselves to pass out many fliers. When other racialists try to avoid discussing racial views with others, not only should we not avoid it, but we should relish it. When others might be afraid people may "find out" about their involvement in the Cause, we must make damn sure they already know about it. For my part, when I meet someone who hasn't hbeard of me previously, I am disappointed. Our enthusiasm shall shine through the skepticism and skewed thinking of our White Racial Comrades. When we approach others with news of our Cause with a buddling enthusiasm, we will have already won half the battle in bringing them to our side. They will wonder why if we are so wrong, as they have been told, why is it that we are so confident that we are right? Perhaps Creativity is worth checking out! The battle for the White Race bas just begun. It has just begun because though Creativity is twenty-two years old, in the scheme of history, Creativity has just begun. The future will go to those who are the most fanatic and who are never satisfied that they have "done enough" for their Race but are always striving to do more. Order books and fliers by the thousands and sell, give, or loan out to our White Racial Comrades and they too shall be imbued with the flame of enthusiasm that moves us and the day shall swiftly come in which we have regained control of our destiny. -Reverend Matt Hale, P.M.
No matter how it's worded there's nothing but bad news regarding our race. There is >NO RAY OF HOPE< anywhere to be found. All the latest horror/bullshit stories will never arouse the Folk to action. If we live so long,one of these days we will see it is too late to do anything to fight back and retake our land. Our children will certainly curse us in our graves. We not only battle against our racial enemies we engage also our own people who are enlisted with the jews and muds. They are the scum of the earth and deserve our deepest hatred. As loyal Aryans how is it we are awake to the situation while our kinfolk hop into bed with "those people" and act like prostitutes giving away a freebie? What is wrong with them? Why aren't they on our side? Polite words escape me as to the fate I wish for them. We are going to lose and the rich,arrogant kike and the cowardly,white traitor will get a good laugh at our expense. The REAL opposition is out there but very quiet. The New 14 Words: "We must ensure the destruction of our enemies and a hel for their children"
Out of the closet" Racialists, Cells and the Lone Wolf There are two paths to choose from for those of us who take up the struggle. The first option is what I term the "out of the closet" activist. These individuals fight to the best of their abilities to spread the message of White survival and rebirth to as many of our racial kin as possible. These White activists use printed material, newspapers, radio, television and most notably the Internet to this end. These courageous individuals walk a dangerous line because the more effective they are the more attention they draw to themselves from law enforcement and from various other enemy organizations. Just about every major city in the western world has a "Hate Crimes Unit" or a similar apparatus which works as a liaison between Jewish interests and the police. These agencies work to identify and build dossiers on White activists who are at work in the area. Their ultimate aim is to infiltrate any White activist group in order to: - Gather incriminating evidence against its members - Discover connections to other groups for further investigation - Undermine, discredit and destroy these groups Undercover agents of these units will attend meetings and rallies held by racial activists and information such as names and descriptions of individual members will be obtained. The Hate Crimes Unit will also collect literature, posters and other materials distributed by activists. These materials will be analyzed for fingerprint evidence in order to begin to identify the members of the group. These fingerprints will be added to the files which law enforcement keeps on those involved in racial activism. The next step in the work of the Hate Crimes Unit is to infiltrate the group in order to gather evidence of the commission of any crimes or any conspiracy to commit crimes by the group. This work is usually done by a lone agent but the use of two or even more infiltrators is not unheard of. If no evidence of criminality is at first obtained the infiltrator will begin to try to push the group to commit a serious or violent crime of some sort or to provide him or her with the means to commit some violent crime and to help plan it. If members of the group are foolish enough to trust the infiltrator they will soon find themselves in jail. This type of activity by law enforcement is well documented. The "Forth Reich Skinheads" case in Los Angeles, the infiltration of "Combat 18" in England and the Grant Bristoe affair involving the "Heritage Front" in Canada are good examples of the use of an "agent-provocateur" to destroy White Nationalist movements and to imprison White men and women. How is this process of law enforcement infiltration and sabotage to be prevented? It can be summed up with one simple rule� No one who is an open activist, known to the media and to police, should ever even entertain the idea of involving themselves in armed struggle. A real separation must exist between those who wage a war of words and those who let actions speak for them. Whenever the open White activist is approached about the idea of armed struggle, he must explain that it is his own personal choice to reject violence but that he also does not condemn those who take up armed struggle in defense of their people. In this way we can neutralize law enforcement use of infiltrators against us. Just as the "out of the closet" White Nationalist must be strictly non-violent, those who choose violent struggle must keep their identities and beliefs secret from all except those directly involved in the movement. This will be a difficult task, made increasingly difficult the more people are involved. For this reason we must employ an organizational structure of small "cells". Each of these cells will have only a few members and will be capable of taking action independently of the others. Only long time acquaintances, with history of trustworthiness, should make up a cell. A handful of dedicated soldiers (no more than 4 or 5) can create an impenetrable, cohesive and effective weapon against the tyranny we face. A single, highly motivated, individual or "Lone Wolf" can also take action on his own. This one-person cell will obviously be impenetrable to law enforcement, however the Lone Wolf may by limited in the scale of attacks he can mount. It is precisely this type of cell structured resistance movement which the traitorous, power-whores who sit in the seat of government fear most. They have no idea how to deal with this type of movement, it has no hierarchical power structure so it cannot be toppled and its cells are too small and too may to infiltrate. Every person who enters this movement must understand that we are a nation in exile, waiting to assume power in the vacuum which will be created by the fall of Western civilization. Citizens of this nation in exile are obligated to be: Aware - The citizenry must educate themselves to a reasonable level on all the issues of concern to White survival. Our enemies must never be able to ask "Why?" without response. Armed - The citizenry must posses weapons suitable for guerilla warfare and understand and how to use them with reasonable proficiency. In some circumstances this will be difficult but it is absolutely imperative that the citizenry of our nation be capable of seizing power when the time comes. Prepared - The citizenry must be both physically and psychologically fit for the coming conflict. It is essential that the citizenry train themselves, like soldiers, and be physically able to fight, perform heavy work and resist exhaustion. Also, like soldiers, it is essential for the citizenry to purge any feelings of sympathy toward our enemies or guilt over the actions which we must take. Feeling of this nature are a symptom of the greatest evil possible in nature's design �weakness.
Molding American Minds For example, a racially mixed couple will be respected, liked, and socially sought after by other characters, as will a "take charge" Black scholar or businessman, or a sensitive and talented homosexual, or a poor but honest and hardworking illegal alien from Mexico. On the other hand, a White racist -- that is, any racially conscious White person who looks askance at miscegenation or at the rapidly darkening racial situation in America -- is portrayed, at best, as a despicable bigot who is reviled by the other characters, or, at worst, as a dangerous psychopath who is fascinated by firearms and is a menace to all law-abiding citizens. The White racist "gun nut," in fact, has become a familiar stereotype on TV shows. The average American, of whose daily life TV-watching takes such an unhealthy portion, distinguishes between these fictional situations and reality only with difficulty, if at all. He responds to the televised actions, statements, and attitudes of TV actors much as he does to his own peers in real life. For all too many Americans the real world has been replaced by the false reality of the TV environment, and it is to this false reality that his urge to conform responds. Thus, when a TV scriptwriter expresses approval of some ideas and actions through the TV characters for whom he is writing, and disapproval of others, he exerts a powerful pressure on millions of viewers toward conformity with his own views. And as it is with TV entertainment, so it is also with the news, whether televised or printed. The insidious thing about this form of thought control is that even when we realize that entertainment or news is biased, the media masters still are able to manipulate most of us. This is because they not only slant what they present, but they establish tacit boundaries and ground rules for the permissible spectrum of opinion. As an example, consider the media treatment of Middle East news. Some editors or commentators are slavishly pro-Israel in their every utterance, while others seem nearly neutral. No one, however, dares suggest that the U.S. government is backing the wrong side in the Arab-Jewish conflict and that it served Jewish interests rather than American interests to send U.S. forces to cripple Iraq, Israel's principal rival in the Middle East. Thus, a spectrum of permissible opinion, from pro-Israel to nearly neutral, is established. Another example is the media treatment of racial issues in the United States. Some commentators seem almost dispassionate in reporting news of racial strife, while others are emotionally partisan -- with the partisanship always on the non-White side. All of the media spokesmen without exception, however, take the position that "multiculturalism" and racial mixing are here to stay, and that they are good things. Because there are differences in degree, however, most Americans fail to realize that they are being manipulated. Even the citizen who complains about "managed news" falls into the trap of thinking that because he is presented with an apparent spectrum of opinion he can escape the thought controllers' influence by believing the editor or commentator of his choice. It's a "heads I win, tails you lose" situation. Every point on the permissible spectrum of public opinion is acceptable to the media masters -- and no impermissible fact or viewpoint is allowed any exposure at all, if they can prevent it. The control of the opinion-molding media is nearly monolithic. All of the controlled media -- television, radio, newspapers, magazines, books, motion pictures -- speak with a single voice, each reinforcing the other. Despite the appearance of variety, there is no real dissent, no alternative source of facts or ideas accessible to the great mass of people that might allow them to form opinions at odds with those of the media masters. They are presented with a single view of the world -- a world in which every voice proclaims the equality of the races, the inerrant nature of the Jewish "Holocaust" tale, the wickedness of attempting to halt the flood of non-White aliens pouring across our borders, the danger of permitting citizens to keep and bear arms, the moral equivalence of all sexual orientations, and the desirability of a "pluralistic," cosmopolitan society rather than a homogeneous one. It is a view of the world designed by the media masters to suit their own ends -- and the pressure to conform to that view is overwhelming. People adapt their opinions to it, vote in accord with it, and shape their lives to fit it. And who are these all-powerful masters of the media? As we shall see, to a very large extent they are Jews. It isn't simply a matter of the media being controlled by profit-hungry capitalists, some of whom happen to be Jews. If that were the case, the ethnicity of the media masters would reflect, at least approximately, the ratio of rich Gentiles to rich Jews. The preponderance of Jews in the media is so overwhelming, however, that we are obliged to assume that it is due to more than mere happenstance.
THE 16 FACTS CRITICAL FACTS THAT YOUR KIDS WILL NOT LEARN IN SCHOOL 1. The White race made America what it is today. 2. American heritage is White heritage. 3. American law is based upon White concepts from White European thought. 4. The American all-White neighborhoods of the past were demonstrably safer, and freer of crime of all sorts than integrated neighborhoods of today. 5. The American all-White schools of the past were clearly superior to any integrated school of today. 6. All great societies of the past which were White as they rose to power, when they changed from being dominantly White, to a dominantly mixed race society, they fell permanently into decay. (e.g. Egypt, Greece, Rome, Spain, Portugal.) 7. Racial integration of our neighborhoods and our schools has forced them into decay, just like the racial integration of the societies of the great White nations of the past caused them to fall into decay. History, both ancient and recent American, has consistently taught the very same lesson. It is clear beyond any debate, that modifying the racial composition of America away from the dominantly White society that it was as it rose to power, towards a mixed, racially diverse society, will be catastrophic. It will plunge the great American nation into the same depths that the other great White nations of the past have fallen into. 8. Based upon the extensive history of the Black race it is clear that it is not capable of creating or maintaining an advanced society. It has never created one advanced society in Africa. In every case (such as Haiti) where it has been given a thriving society, it has killed it, driving it into the same primitive state that its people have always lived in, in their native Africa. (For any who is foolish enough to doubt history, we have the sad spectacle of South Africa playing out before us, which should erase all doubts.) 9. History has shown us that the Black race cannot create or maintain an advanced society on its own. Its members therefore, as a people, cannot well fit into an advanced society, as equals, living and working beside those who not only are capable of building one advanced society, but have built numerous such societies in all climates and in all types of land. 10. History has shown us that the Hispanic peoples are also deficient in creating advanced societies like the White race has repeatedly created. While they have shown ability that is superior to the Black race, by creating their own written language and some moderately advanced societies they have not been able to take the superior natural resources of the South American continent and do much with them. 11. Spain and Portugal sent soldiers to the lands south of the Rio Grande to conquer and take the wealth of the land. Instead of sending families to colonize, the Spanish men took native wives. The racial makeup of the lands south of the Rio Grande is composed of American Indian, Black, mixed-race and a small percentage of Whites thrown in. Their lands have never thrived like the nations to the north where Whites colonized and kept their race in tact, seldom mixing their race with others. 12. By "celebrating diversity" we are bringing in the Hispanic and Asian peoples into White America and we will cause the North American continent to become like the South American continent. The great wealth and stable society of the White United States will be traded for the poverty and instability of the revolution torn countries south of our border. 13. Even if all races were exactly the same, if there were no differences whatsoever, the fact that Whites created the nation of the United States of America, means that we are completely within our honorable rights to restrict entrance into our country. We may honorably allow only White immigrants, or no immigrants at all. 14. The number of Whites, as a percentage of world population, is now down into the single digits and falling fast. 15. Nearly all of the White nations on earth are now accepting large numbers of Nonwhite immigrants. The only one of the three major races of earth, that is in real danger of falling into a minority status in its own racial home, is the White race. This could easily lead to extermination of the White race. 16. Those who support American diversity, Nonwhite immigration, miscegenation, integration, and/or Affirmative Action, are either: 1) ignorant of the above critical facts; or 2) blatant haters of the White race and seeking to end its existence on planet Earth. ++++
Subj: AmDissidentVoices: Raising White Children in a Multicultural Society Date: 11/16/2002 4:57:18 AM Eastern Standard Time Raising White Children in a Multicultural Society: a Speech by Jan Cartwright Introduced by Kevin Alfred Strom American Dissident Voices Broadcast of November 16, 2002 Welcome to American Dissident Voices. I'm Kevin Alfred Strom. Today I'm going to take you inside a recent National Alliance leadership conference to hear an important speech by one of our members, Mrs. Jan Cartwright. Her speech is mostly extemporaneous and unscripted, and it exemplifies the community values I spoke about last week: the essential unity of sex, love, family, children, nation, and race -- a unity which the Jewish establishment tries to fracture and destroy at every opportunity. Mrs. Cartwright will tell us from the heart how she brings that unity to bear in her own life and the lives of her husband and children. She is an intelligent and inspiring woman. Her talk is entitled Raising White Children in a Multicultural Society and she is introduced by the Chairman of the National Alliance, Mr. Erich Gliebe. So let's join that National Alliance meeting now. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= ERICH GLIEBE: Our next speaker has been a member since 1976; her husband has been a member even longer, I believe since '75. She's the mother of four beautiful children. All of them were born at home. All of them are home-schooled. Right now let's have a nice warm welcome for Mrs. Jan Cartwright. (audience applause) JAN CARTWRIGHT: Like Erich said, I've been a member since 1976 when I turned 18. I was lucky: I met my husband when I was very young, and he showed me why society was collapsing. I was asked to speak because I raise White children in a multicultural society. Perhaps that's because I have more than your average White American family: We're told that we shouldn't have too many children, there are too many in the world to care for. Perhaps some people are impressed by how my children behave. I've taught them not to embarrass me in public. I can take them anywhere and expect them to act like civilized human beings instead of some animals. I believe in quality and quantity. My goal when I first got married was to have at least eleven children. Unfortunately, fertility problems kind of skewed that a little bit. But I haven't given up yet. I'm 43 and I refuse to give up until the last egg drops. Our children are the future. Children, if raised properly, will know that they are the future and that they have to carry on when we're gone. The very first thing, though, that you need to do to accomplish that goal is to have a mate who's kind of cooperative about that kind of thing. Some of you don't have mates. I expect you all to have mates or at least semi-mates before next year�. (audience laughter) That's my pet peeve. My husband and I were lucky enough to find each other and have like minds. We knew that the race was crumbling, that we were our last hope. But if you're not fortunate enough to have someone of like mind, at least find someone who is racially conscious -- conscious of what race they are. I mean, Madeline Albright didn't even know she was Jewish! You need to have your mate supportive of your basic principles. You can't have them going "malling" every day, and "hip-hopping" down the road; it's not going to work. Your children will be muddled and confused about what their role is and what they're expected to do. I'm sure that a lot of you think that I'm crazy, bringing children into such a strange world. It's very obvious that the world is in a bad situation. But if we don't procreate, we're gone. That's one of my other pet peeves. The jungle will overrun our fields, our beautiful fields of flowers. You can liken our children to flowers. They will be overrun by the jungle. We've educated our children in their racial heritage and how important it is that we achieve our goals for the future. They know what's to come. They are schooled in race, and why the social powers-that-be want to destroy our kind. They know the enemy has control of every aspect of the media, and they know how to read between the lines. Our children have ready access to scores of books that tell them the truth about history and politics. Children should know the world is not like Sesame Street. It's not like Barney. It's not like MTV. Some of the books we read to our children are about strife and triumph over unimaginable odds. For instance, we just read them The Long Walk by Slavomir Rawicz. They were very impressed by the fact that they could survive with an axe-head and a cup and cross the Gobi Desert, and lose only a very few. Soon after that we read In Deadly Combat, a book written by Gottlob Herbert Bidermann. He was a soldier in the Second World War. He fought against the Russians in Crimea. It was amazing the overwhelming odds that he fought against: they had one weapon and fought against a whole group of tanks. And my children were impressed by the fact that our spirit did not give up. Our men did not give in. We have read to our children from many different older writings as well. We read from the Elder Edda, and from mythology. That is the soul of our people, of our race. We can't trust the schools to do that. Like Erich said, I home-school. I have a 14-year-old, a 12-year-old, an 11-year-old, and a seven-year-old. And they have not made one step inside of a public school since they were born. We can't trust them. With the multicultural crap that's shoved down their throats from the beginning of preschool, we cannot trust them. If you send your children to public school, that's the worst thing you can do. But private schools, Christian schools -- they're all the same. They all teach the same "let's all get along" "Pepsi generation" multiculturalism. I don't want to sound like an alarmist or a paranoid person, but as soon as you send your children into school (and remember the schoolyard and the experiences they have there), whatever you've tried to do to teach your child the truth, as soon as they collide with the vigorous force of all of this multicultural garbage, it's hard for them to hold up. Imagine being three years old, and how frightened you are of adults. They are the authority figures. When you're at home, they are your authority figures. When you go out in public, they're the authority figures. And remember the teacher has the power of the Almighty Grade. If you want a little star for citizenship, you'd better be able to parrot back those cute little answers that they have about "we're all one race," "we're all the same"�. It doesn't work. Even if you warn them about these horrors before they get into school, they're still bombarded with it. And the peer pressure is phenomenal. Many people think that private or parochial schools would be better. Unfortunately, because most of those children come from well-to-do families, the children seem to have more time and money on their hands than they should. They get involved with moral pirates who prey on them in schoolyards. They have the money, they have the wealth; they can just throw it around. The parents are not around to guide their offspring. They have their careers to attend to. Mommy can go back to work as soon as the baby's six weeks old. She can send him into the nursery. And the baby is raised by who knows who. We can send little Johnny or Susie to nursery school, and they even have 24-hour day care where I live. You can actually send your child to day care all day and all night -- why don't you just get a puppy? If you can't take care of the baby, why don't you just get a puppy? 24-hour daycare; they can just be bombarded from the time they wake up to the time they go to bed. Our children have been in my husband's or my care, except for two very short instances -- when I was in labor we couldn't handle a toddler running around and getting into things. That was pretty much it. We have taken them everywhere; we don't live in a bubble; they have had experiences that most of you probably have not had. They know what's out there. They know what they're up against. I've watched my friends bemoan the fact that their children turned out the way they did: "Why did little Johnny turn out like that?" I look at how they raise their children, how they can't wait until school starts -- just can't wait till school starts to send them back to school. I said "Do you know what they're being taught? Are you aware of the filth and the lies?" I could easily go back to my field of nursing. I have an RN degree. I could go to work, making forty to fifty dollars an hour, no problem. I can go anywhere in the country and work for that. But then I would probably have to trust the raising of my children to somebody else. That wouldn't do for me. They would be thrown to the wolves for the most part -- morally poverty-stricken people who don't know right from wrong. They learn their morals from MTV and Madonna and so forth. We have kept them under our protective wing. But that does not mean that they have not experienced the world. They have seen the demon unmasked. They have time to play; we don't demand that they work 24 hours a day, seven days a week on tasks and activities that we're involved in. But they're expected to know something. They are not watching television every day. They don't even like Sesame Street or Barney: when they've seen them, they say "What's this garbage?" Which reminds me of a wonderful cartoon; I love to show it to people. It has a picture of a television set, just sitting on the table. And underneath is the title: TRUE EDUCATION. And the damn thing is unplugged. (audience laughter) My children do not watch television. Upon occasion we do view the news, but that's about it. We discuss what we've seen, and they know to read between the lines. We can't even trust the educational channels. I don't know if you folks have actually seen any of those lately, but they're pretty amazing. Children are too young to split apart the truth from the "glitz and glimmer" that's on television, to read between the lines and look behind everything. If they're just sat in front of that Almighty Television -- they're lost. They're totally confused. Because you're telling them one thing, and Madonna with her glimmery outfit is telling them another thing. Some of the people here said they were sociology majors. I've read in many studies that if you are the sole source of moral and ethical standards for at least the first seven to eight years of a child's life, you have a fighting chance of having them learn something of value. That's one of the reasons the public schools want your children so soon. Now, every school has pre-kindergarten. "You can send them to pre-kindergarten and they'll be fine. We'll teach them everything they need to know." They want them as soon as they're out of diapers. So they can pollute your mind from the beginning. The teachers sometimes act like "gods" -- I mean, little kids look up to adults. And so, when they teach them all these games and songs, they think, "Oh, this person's so great. They know games and songs. Mommy and Daddy don't sing songs, they don't play games. They come home from work and they collapse on the couch." Because they're working for this almighty dollar. They have to get things. They have to have things. Things don't make you a morally just person. The parents will pale in comparison to the teachers. It's very typical for a child to be able to distinguish between hard work and just plain rubbish. Schools are the programming center for the New World Order. I don't know if you've ever read the books that they have for the children to read for school, but they're taught many lies from the moment they walk in the door, the latest being the new-found "patriotism" -- or, to coin a term, flagotism -- which is just another mindless step toward the edge of the cliff. As home-schoolers, we expect our children to think, not just parrot back nonsense. Children's books are found at schools and public libraries that blather on about other cultures, "superior" compared to ours. Are you aware that the British actually lost at Roarke's Drift to the Zulus? We found that in a schoolbook. We sent the author a lovely letter. Plus the publisher. The Jew that wrote the book wrote so nicely about the Zulus and how honorable they were. He said nothing about how great our civilization is. They live in huts. They don't ever build anything above a one storey building. But we know how well the Jews can be trusted with the truth. Our children know that so-called "holocaust" Jews collect millions of dollars in "restitution" money in just about every country in the world. They know about the mainstream Christian dogma that the Jews are "God's Chosen People." At our home, we pretty much believe like the chorus of one of the skinhead songs that my son really loves to listen to, and that is that "our race is our religion." At home we follow an older religion than Christianity. As part of all our ceremonies, there is one point that my children feel very deeply about, and that is: "May the power of the gods aid us in our war against those who seek to bring gray slavery to our people." My children know the true path our race must take. That path is not an easy path. We have tried to prepare them in mind and body for the struggle ahead. They are no strangers to pitching in and working hard to help the family and ultimately the race. When Harley was still in diapers, he was up on the roof pounding nails with the rest of us. If there's a project that needs to be done at our house, the children are expected to help to the best of their abilities. They learn valuable skills instead of how to win Nintendo games. My husband and I are not monetarily rich, but our children have learned very early how to earn a buck. We're going on our fifth year for the children selling their own produce, which they're involved in from the time of planting, through tilling, to the process of selling their product at the end of the drive. We can't afford to give them the "latest" of much, so they've learned early that they need to work hard for what "extra" they want. But my theory is that what we work for is valued more than something that is just dropped in our laps. And our neighbors seem to be impressed by that. I've had firemen in parades say, "Are you going to have tomatoes for sale again this year?" And they're impressed by how our children will go out and run. That's one of the reasons my family's not here with me today: They're competing in a race. They'll go out and run in six-degree weather. They're determined to do well. I've had people actually come up to tell us "Aren't you the children that run?" My older ones train year-round and occasionally take their abilities to races. Like I said, they're on a run right now. Hopefully, I'll have good news this evening about my son running his first five-mile race, and his success. My boys tend to put their hearts and souls into all their efforts, like our Aryan forefathers did. And I've read many places that man strives for perfection. My children complain from time to time when I have them correct their schoolwork. They say, "But if we were in public school we wouldn't have to do that. Why do we have to do it?" My answer is that two plus two does not equal five even if that makes you feel good, like in public school. Often in public school, as I have said before, children are not corrected when they are in error -- because it might hurt their feelings. It might destroy their self-esteem. Excuses are made for why they fail. At home we expect results, not excuses. The old adage "If at first you don't succeed, try try again" has fallen out of fashion -- except at our house. The world is full of people who make excuses for their failures. That's one of the reasons we've gone from a race that put man on the moon to a bunch of soft, whiny babies. I'm sure that the men and women in this room are bright enough to teach their own children. Society can't teach them anything of any value. So I recommend highly, if at all possible, that you home-school your children. I have literature on how to home-school your children, if you want it. We don't need "experts" to teach our children what we want them to know. We've all graduated from high school. I've just read recently about Amish ladies and Amish schools. The teachers in Amish schools are young girls, 18, 19, 20 years old. They've never gone to college to teach anybody anything. But they're expected by the eighth grade to know how to write and read in both English and German. They're expected to do it properly. Two plus two does not equal five in their schools. One of the things that's another pet peeve of mine -- I know that this might upset a few people, might make people squirm a little bit; I know I made a lot of people squirm at the Cleveland meeting when I said something about it -- but we need to further our race, we need to make our race strong again, and that means going out and procreating. Hello, you in the back, you in the front. (audience laughter) If we don't, we are lost. My intentions are to make my own little "unit," my own little army -- as Mr. Lawrence said, my own little Viking crew. They're determined. They are strong. They are smart. And that's the kind of people we need. We need more of us -- to coin a phrase -- and less of them. Thank you. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= You've been listening to a speech given by Mrs. Jan Cartwright at a recent meeting of the National Alliance. Let's review the important concepts presented in her talk. 1 -- We each need a mate, conscious of his or her race, who is in accord with our basic racial principles. I would add that no value, no belief, and no personal need or desire, can be placed higher than those racial principles. 2 -- We need our children to understand the social forces that would destroy them. 3 -- Our children should have daily contact with quality books on race and history, and they should be inspired by tales of White men and women prevailing over overwhelming odds. 4 -- You cannot trust the schools today to do right by our children; home-schooling is the best alternative. 5 -- Television, except for historical or news broadcasts, with family discussions afterwards to teach the children to "read between the lines," should not be part of their lives. 6 -- Our children need to be taught to think for themselves, and to be able to see the lies in mainstream books, mainstream films, and mainstream religion for what they are. 7 -- They need to learn to be wise to the alien nature and the historical role of the Jews, and to be aware of their "holocaust" extortion racket and their pernicious "chosen people" myth. 8 -- Children need a religious basis, by which I mean not dogma based on ancient writings, but a faith in the maxim: "Our race is our religion." That value must have priority over all other values. 9 -- Children need to pitch in and contribute to all family projects and goals from a very young age. They are not here just to be entertained; we and they need to believe they are important and part of something greater than themselves. Understanding that they are an important part of the family leads to an understanding that the family is in turn part of the race. 10 -- Encourage your children to excel, to put their hearts and souls into all their endeavors. 11 -- We need to further our race by procreation -- and by teaching our infinitely precious children well. I thank Jan Cartwright for her heart-felt speech at our National Alliance conference, and for her permission to use it on the air today. I thank her for being an exemplary mother to the next generation of our people, and I thank her for being our teacher as well. I ask each and every one of you who hears these words to hearken to them, and to help our National Alliance community grow stronger with every passing day. Please write and tell us what you will do to help. Until next week, this is Kevin Alfred Strom reminding you to keep on thinking free. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= The text above is based on a broadcast of the American Dissident Voices radio program sponsored by National Vanguard Books. It is distributed by e-mail each Saturday to subscribers of ADV-list.
ARYAN WOMANS LEAGUE Aryan Nations Womens League.. A Place for the Fairer of our Race to discuss Womanly duties such as Godliness, Marital Commitments, Motherhood, Home schooling and the General role of Women who are Attentive to the Welfare of our People... Who can find a virtuous woman? For her prices is far above rubies. The heart of her husband doth safely trust in her, so that he shall have no need of spoil. She will do him good and not evil all the days of her life. She seeketh wool, and flax, and worketh willingly with her hands. She is like the merchants’ ships; she bringeth her food from afar. She riseth also while it is yet night, & giveth meat to her household, & a portion to her maidens. She considereth herself a field, & buyeth it: with the fruit of her hands she planteth a vineyard. She girdeth her loins with strength, and strengtheneth her arms. She perceiveth that her merchandise is good: her candle goeth not out by night. She layeth her hands to the spindle, and her hands hold the distaff. She stretcheth out her hand to the poor; yea, she reacheth forth her hands to the needy. She is not afraid of the snow for her household: for all her household are clothed with scarlet. She maketh herself coverings of tapestry; her clothing is silk and purple. Her husband is known in the gates, when he sitteth among the elders of the land. She maketh fine linen, and selleth it; and delivereth girdles unto the merchant. Strength and honor are her clothing; and she shall rejoice in time to come. She openeth her mouth with wisdom; and her tongue is the law of kindness. She looketh well to the ways of her household, and eateth not the bread of idleness. Her children arise up, and call her blessed; her husband also, and he praiseth her. Many daughters have done virtuously, but thou excellest them all. Favour is deceitful, and beauty is vain: but a woman that feareth YHVH, she shall be praised. Give her of the fruit of her hands; and let her own works praise her in the gates. Do these praises sound like those of a liberal woman of today? NO, this is a description of a Godly woman, an Israelite who looks not to the ways of the world but to YHVH. This woman knows her place as a wife and mother. Where are these women? YHVH’s laws were written to protect us from evil while at the same time give us freedom to pursue good things that would benefit us. Under YHVH women have different roles then men. This does not make us less in YHVH’s plan just different. It states in 1Corinthians 11:3 “But know you that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.�? By understanding the relationship between YHVH, man, and woman we can see the parallel lesson in marriage. Throughout Scripture we see how a husband is to treat a wife and vice versa. Here are a few more examples in Scripture: Wives to be in subjection to their husbands: Gen. 3:16; Eph. 5:22,24; Col. 3:18; Pet.3:1,5-6 Wives are to be modest, chaste, discreet, and sober: 1Tim 2:9,15; Tit. 2:4-5 The wife is to take care of the house and family needs: Prov.14:1; Prov. 31:10-31; 1Tim. 5:14, Tit. 2:5 There are several others but I figure these are a good representation. For every law a woman is to keep there are also ones for men. I will get into that in a following issue. Many good Christian Aryan men sit and complain about the lack of good Christian women. I say look at yourself and other men for your problem. Our men many times turn our own women away. One of the best things you can do for yourself and your Race is to learn the laws and follow them. Stop for a minute and think about how brainwashed many are into thinking that morals and values aren’t as important as they us to be. The acceptance of pornography, homosexuality, and all the other Jewish influence is like lying down and giving up. Get your brains out of the gutter and rise to the higher Aryan standard. I broke the chains they placed on me and will no longer be a slave. Being an Israelite true in my heart I cannot give up the fight. I will be the woman that YHVH has made me with dignity and honor. This is just one of the many articles that can be found in Far Above Rubies, an Identity publication for families. If you are interested in learning more about FAR you may contact me at sig_ia@sigrdrifa.net . Praise YHVH! Hail HIS Victory!!! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- “Therefore I endure all things for the elect’s sakes...." II Timothy 2:10 Hail YHVH! Hail His Victory! Hate the evil, Love the good!
Leaderless Resistance.. by Louis Beame The Seditionist (#12, Feb 92) The concept of Leaderless Resistance was proposed by Col. Ulius Louis Amoss, who was the founder of International Service of Information Incorporated, located in Baltimore, Maryland. Col. Amoss died more than fifteen years ago, but during his life was a tireless opponent of communism, as well as a skilled Intelligence Officer. Col. Amoss first wrote of Leaderless Resistance on April 17, 1962. His theories of organization were primarily directed against the threat of eventual Communist take-over in the United States. The present writer, with the benefit of having lived many years beyond Col. Amoss, has taken his theories and expounded upon them. Col. Amoss feared the Communists. This author fears the federal government. Communism now represents a threat to no one in the United States, while federal tyranny represents a threat to everyone . The writer has joyfully lived long enough to see the dying breaths of communism, but may, unhappily, remain long enough to see the last grasps of freedom in America. In the hope that, somehow, America can still produce the brave sons and daughters necessary to fight off ever increasing persecution and oppression, this essay is offered. Frankly, it is too close to call at this point. Those who love liberty, and believe in freedom enough to fight for it are rare today, but within the bosom of every once great nation, there remains secreted, the pearls of former greatness. They are there. I have looked into their sparking eyes; sharing a brief moment in time with them as I passed through this life. Relished their friendship, endured their pain, and they mine. We are a band of brothers, native to the soil gaining strength one from another as we have rushed head long into a battle that all the weaker, timid men, say we can not win. Perhaps...but then again, perhaps we can. It's not over till the last freedom fighter is buried or imprisoned, or the same happens to those who would destroy their freedom. Barring any cataclysmic events, the struggle will yet go on for years. The passage of time will make it clear to even the more slow among us that the government is the foremost threat to the life, and liberty of the folk. The government will no doubt make today's oppressiveness look like grade school work compared to what they have planned in the future. Meanwhile, there are those of us who continue to hope that somehow the few can do what the many have not. We are cognizant that before things get better they will certainly get worse as government shows a willingness to use ever more severe police state measures against dissidents. This changing situation makes it clear that those who oppose state repression must be prepared to alter, adapt, and modify their behavior, strategy, and tactics as circumstances warrant. Failure to consider new methods and implement them as necessary will make the government's efforts at suppression uncomplicated. It is the duty of every patriot to make the tyrant's life miserable. When one fails to do so he not only fails himself, but his people. With this in mind, current methods of resistance to tyranny employed by those who love our race, culture, and heritage must pass a litmus test of soundness. Methods must be objectively measured as to their effectiveness, as well as to whether they make the government's intention of repression more possible or more difficult. Those not working to aid our objectives must be discarded or the government benefits from our failure to do so. As honest men who have banded together into groups or associations of a political or religious nature are falsely labeled "domestic terrorists" or "cultists" and suppressed, it will become necessary to consider other methods of organization--or as the case may very well call for: non-organization. One should keep in mind that it is not in the government's interest to eliminate all groups. Some few must remain in order to perpetuate the smoke and mirrors vision for the masses that America is a "free democratic country" where dissent is allowed. Most organizations, however, that possess the potential for effective resistance will not be allowed to continue. Anyone who is so naive as to believe the most powerful government on earth will not crush any who pose a real threat to that power, should not be active, but rather, at home studying political history. The question as to who is to be left alone and who is not, will be answered by how groups and individuals deal with several factors such as: avoidance of conspiracy plots, rejection of feeble minded malcontents, insistence upon quality of the participants, avoidance of all contact with the front men for the federals--the news media--and, finally, camouflage (which can be defined as the ability to blend in the public's eye the more committed groups of resistance with mainstream "kosher" associations that are generally seen as harmless.) Primarily though, whether any organization is allowed to continue in the future will be a matter of how big a threat a group represents. Not a threat in terms of armed might or political ability, for there is none of either for the present, but rather, threat in terms of potentiality. It is potential the federals fear most. Whether that potential exists in an individual or group is incidental. The federals measure potential threat in terms of what might happen given a situation conducive to action on the part of a restive organization or individual. Accurate intelligence gathering allows them to assess the potential. Showing one's hand before the bets are made, is a sure wayto loose. The movement for freedom is rapidly approaching the point where for many people, the option of belonging to a group will be nonexistent. For others, group membership will be a viable option for only the immediate future. Eventually, and perhaps much sooner than most believe possible, the price paid for membership will exceed any perceived benefit. But for now, some of the groups that do exist often serve a useful purpose either for the newcomer who can be indoctrinated into the ideology of the struggle, or for generating positive propaganda to reach potential freedom fighters. It is sure that, for the most part, this struggle is rapidly becoming a matter of individual action, each of its participants making a private decision in the quietness of his heart to resist: to resist by any means necessary. It is hard to know what others will do, for no man truly knows another man's heart. It is enough to know what one himself will do. A great teacher once said "know thyself." Few men really do, but let each of us, promise ourselves, not to go quietly to the fate our would-be masters haveplanned. The concept of Leaderless Resistance is nothing less than a fundamental departure in theories of organization. The orthodox scheme of organization is diagrammatically represented by the pyramid, with the mass at the bottom and the leader at the top. This fundamental of organization is to be seen not only in armies, which are of course, the best illustration of the pyramid structure, with the mass of soldiery, the privates, at the bottom responsible to corporals who are in turn responsible to sergeants, and so on up the entire chain of command to the generals at the top. But the same structure is seen in corporations, ladies' garden clubs and in our political system itself. This orthodox "pyramid" scheme of organization is to be seen basically in all existing political, social and religious structures in the world today from the Federal government to the Roman Catholic Church. The Constitution of the United States, in the wisdom of the Founders, tried to sublimate the essential dictatorial nature of pyramidal organization by dividing authority into three: executive, legislative and judicial. But the pyramid remains essentially untouched. This scheme of organization, the pyramid, is however, not only useless, but extremely dangerous for the participants when it is utilized in a resistance movement against state tyranny. Especially is this so in technologically advanced societies where electronic surveillance can often penetrate the structure revealing its chain of command. Experience has revealed over and over again that anti-state, political organizations utilizing this method of command and control are easy prey for government infiltration, entrapment, and destruction of the personnel involved. This has been seen repeatedly in the United States where pro-government infiltrators or agent provocateurs weasel their way into patriotic groups and destroy them from within. In the pyramid type of organization, an infiltrator can destroy anything which is beneath his level of infiltration and often those above him as well. If the traitor has infiltrated at the top, then the entire organization from the top down is compromised and may be traduced at will. An alternative to the pyramid type of organization is the cell system. In the past, many political groups (both right and left) have used the cell system to further their objectives. Two examples will suffice. During the American Revolution "committees of correspondence" were formed throughout the Thirteen colonies. Their purpose was to subvert the government and thereby aid the cause of independence. The "Sons of Liberty", who made a name for themselves dumping government taxed tea into the harbor at Boston, were the action arm of the committees of correspondence. Each committee was a secret cell that operated totally independently of the other cells. Information on the government was passed from committee to committee, from colony to colony, and then acted upon on a local basis. Yet even in these bygone days of poor communication, of weeks to months for a letter to be delivered, the committees without any central direction whatsoever, were remarkable similar in tactics employed to resist government tyranny. It was, as the first American patriots knew, totally unnecessary for anyone to give an order for anything. Information was made available to each committee, and each committee acted as it saw fit. A recent example of the cell system taken from the left wing of politics are the Communists. The Communist, in order to get around the obvious problems involved in pyramidal organization, developed to an art the cell system. They had numerous independent cells which operated completely isolated from one another and particularly with no knowledge of each other, but were orchestrated together by a central headquarters. For instance, during World War II, in Washington, it is known that there were at least six secret Communist cells operating at high levels in the United States government (plus all the open Communists who were protected and promoted by President Roosevelt), however, only one of the cells was rooted out and destroyed. How many more actually were operating no one can say for sure. The Communist cells which operated in the U.S until late 1991 under Soviet control could have at their command a leader, who held a social position which appeared to be very lowly. He could be, for example, a busboy in a restaurant, but in reality a colonel or a general in the Soviet Secret Service, the KGB. Under him could be a number of cells and a person active in one cell would almost never have knowledge of individuals who are active in another cell. The value of this is that while any one cell can be infiltrated, exposed or destroyed, such action will have no effect on the other cells; in fact, the members of the other cells will be supporting that cell which is under attack and ordinarily would lend very strong support to it in many ways. This is at least part of the reason, no doubt, that whenever in the past Communists were attacked in this country, support for them sprang up in many unexpected places. The efficient and effective operation of a cell system after the Communist model, is of course, dependent upon central direction, which means impressive organization, funding from the top, and outside support, all of which the Communists had. Obviously, American patriots have none of these things at the top or anywhere else, and so an effective cell organization based upon the Soviet system of operation is impossible. Two things become clear from the above discussion. First, that the pyramid type of organization can be penetrated quite easily and it thus is not a sound method of organization in situations where the government has the resources and desire to penetrate the structure; which is the situation in this country. Secondly, that the normal qualifications for the cell structure based upon the Red model does not exist in the U.S. for patriots. This understood, the question arises "What method is left for those resisting state tyranny?" The answer comes from Col. Amoss who proposed the "Phantom Cell" mode of organization. Which he described as Leaderless Resistance. A system of organization that is based upon the cell organization, but does not have any central control or direction, that is in fact almost identical to the methods used by the Committees of Correspondence during the American Revolution. Utilizing the Leaderless Resistance concept, all individuals and groups operate independently of each other, and never report to a central headquarters or single leader for direction or instruction, as would those who belong to a typical pyramidorganization. At first glance, such a type of organization seems unrealistic, primarily because there appears to be no organization. The natural question thus arises as to how are the "Phantom cells" and individuals to cooperate with each other when there is no intercommunication or central direction? The answer to this question is that participants in a program of Leaderless Resistance through phantom cell or individual action must know exactly what they are doing, and how to do it. It becomes the responsibility of the individual to acquire the necessary skills and information as to what is to be done. This is by no means as impractical as it appears, because it is certainly true that in any movement, all persons involved have the same general outlook, are acquainted with the same philosophy, and generally react to given situations in similar ways. The pervious history of the committees of correspondence during the American Revolution show this to be true. Since the entire purpose of Leaderless Resistance is to defeat state tyranny (at least insofar as this essay is concerned), all members of phantom cells or individuals will tend to react to objective events in the same way through usual tactics of resistance. Organs of information distribution such as newspapers, leaflets, computers, etc., which are widely available to all, keep each person informed of events, allowing for a planned response that will take many variations. No one need issue an order to anyone. Those idealist truly committed to the cause of freedom will act when they feel the time is ripe, or will take their cue from others who precede them. While it is true that much could be said against this type of structure as a method of resistance, it must be kept in mind that Leaderless Resistance is a child of necessity. The alternatives to it have been show to be unworkable or impractical. Leaderless Resistance has worked before in the American Revolution, and if the truly committed put it to use for themselves, it will work now. It goes almost without saying that Leaderless Resistance leads to very small or even one man cells of resistance. Those who join organizations to play "let's pretend" or who are "groupies" will quickly be weeded out. While for those who are serious about their opposition to federal despotism, this is exactly what is desired. From the point of view of tyrants and would be potentates in the federal bureaucracy and police agencies, nothing is more desirable than that those who oppose them be UNIFIED in their command structure, and that every person who opposes them belong to a pyramid type group. Such groups and organizations are an easy kill. Especially in light of the fact that the Justice (sic) Department promised in 1987 that there would never be another group that opposed them that they did not have at least one informer in. These federal "friends of government" are intelligence agents. They gather information that can be used at the whim of a federal D.A. to prosecute. The line of battle has been drawn. Patriots are required therefore, to make a conscious decision to either aid the government in its illegal spying, by continuing with old methods of organization and resistance, or to make the enemie's job more difficult by implementing effective countermeasures. Now there will, no doubt, be mentally handicapped people out there who, while standing at a podium with an American flag draped in the background, and a lone eagle soaring in the sky above, will state emphatically in their best sounding red, white, and blue voice, "So what if the government is spying? We are not violating any laws." Such crippled thinking by any serious person is the best example that there is a need for special education classes. The person making such a statement is totally out of contact with political reality in this country, and unfit for leadership of any thing more than a dog sleigh in the Alaskan wilderness. The old "Born on the fourth of July" mentality that has influenced so much of the American patriot's thinking in the past will not save him from the government in the future. "Reeducation" for non-thinkers of this type will take place in the federal prison system where there are no flags or eagles, but abundance of men who were "not violating any law." Most groups who "unify" their disparate associates into a single structure have short political lives. Therefore, those movement leaders constantly calling for unity of organization rather than the desirable unity of purpose, usually fall into one of three categories. They may not be sound political tacticians, but rather, just committed men who feel unity would help their cause, while not realizing that the government would greatly benefit from such efforts. The Federal objective, to imprison or destroy all who oppose them, is made easier in pyramid organizations. Or perhaps, they do not fully understand the struggle they are involved in and that the government they oppose has declared a state of war against those fighting for faith, folk, freedom and constitutional liberty. Those in power will use any means to rid themselves of opposition. The third class calling for unity and let us hope this is the minority of the three, are men more desirous of the supposed power that a large organization would bestow, than of actually achieving their stated purpose. Conversely, the last thing Federal snoops would have, if they had any choice in the matter, is a thousand different small phantom cells opposing them. It is easy to see why. Such a situation is an intelligence nightmare for a government intent upon knowing everything they possibly can about those who oppose them. The Federals, able to amass overwhelming strength of numbers, manpower, resources, intelligence gathering, and capability at any given time, need only a focal point to direct their anger. A single penetration of a pyramid type of organization can lead to the destruction of the whole. Whereas, Leaderless Resistance presents no single opportunity for the Federals to destroy a significant portion of the Resistance. With the announcement by the Department of Justice (sic) that 300 FBI agents formerly assigned to watching Soviet spies in the US (domestic counter intelligence) are now to be used to "combat crime", the federal government is preparing the way for a major assault upon those persons opposed to their policies. Many anti-government groups dedicated to the preservation of the America of our forefathers can expect shortly to feel the brunt of a new federal assault upon liberty. It is clear, therefore, that it is time to rethink traditional strategy and tactics when it comes to opposing a modern police state. America is quickly moving into a long dark night of police state tyranny, where the rights now accepted by most as being inalienable will disappear. Let the coming night be filled with a thousand points of resistance. Like the fog which forms when conditions are right and disappears when they are not, so must the resistance to tyranny be.
BNP..(British Nationalist Party) Politics of Persuasion Mark Deavin (Spearhead / British Nationalist Party)May 98 Not so long ago, as I was walking down the aisles of a large Waterstone�s bookshop, my attention was captured by a book with the eye-catching title of Unlimited Power: the New Science of Personal Achievement. Scanning the sleeve notes, I was informed that I was holding in my hands the ��definitive text in the human potential movement,�� written by ��one of the leading thinkers in the psychology of motivation and achievement.�� Delving into the introduction, I found my curiosity further aroused by the claim that the book would teach me the ��laws of �Optimum Performance Technologies�,�� which were the keys to leadership, persuasion and success. Interested in any which might serve the advance the British Nationalist cause, I bought the book. The central thesis of Unlimited Power is that the attainment of power and success in life is no accident but lies in the ability effectively to communicate both with yourself and with others. While this idea is obviously not new in itself, the book's originality and potential lies in its detailed exposition of the increasingly recognised scientific basis for successful communication. This incorporates, in particular, the system known as �Neuro-Linguistic Programming� (NLP), which studies and applies how language, both verbal and non-verbal, affects the human nervous system. The pioneers of NLP were two Americans: John Grinder, a prominent linguist, and Richard Bandler, a mathematician and computer expert. Grinder and Bandler set out to understand how and why successful people were such effective communicators, and then to develop a system whereby such results could be replicated. Their research, confirmed by numerous studies since, supported the theory that presentation was the most crucial element in any successful communication. In fact it was discovered that only a small amount of what is communicated between people (around 7 per cent) is transmitted through the actual words themselves. The rest derives from how those words are presented, particularly in the tone of the language used and the psychology of the communicator. DEVELOPING RAPPORT According to this theory of communication, even the most fundamental truth will have little effect unless it is presented in a manner which, by developing a substantial amount of natural rapport with the targeted audience, is capable of achieving effective persuasion. Such persuasion, moreover, is ultimately dependent upon the extent to which a sophisticated tactical flexibility is employed by the communicator to enable him to establish the necessary �agreement frame� with the particular audience he wants to persuade. How to produce this �agreement frame� most effectively forms the underlying basis of the NLP philosophy. The proposed method has been aptly described by Anthony Robbins, author of Unlimited Power, as �Aikido politics�, whereby the communicator seeks to produce the least possible resistance in his targeted audience. The idea behind this theory is that, rather than pushing aggressively or trying to bludgeon an acceptance of an argument, a successful communication is best achieved through gently �aligning� an opposing viewpoint with that of your own by finding points of agreement, and then gradually �leading� the other viewpoint around to your position. By this method, it is argued, an �avenue of redirection� can be created which can often adroitly sidestep any possible or expected hostileresponse. Based upon neurological and psycho-logical arguments, the theory of �Aikido Politics� proposes that people are more easily persuaded of something if the persuader communicates with a sense of humility and modest diffidence, using moderate, uncontroversial language which avoids, where and when possible, the triggering of negative responses in the targeted audience. In the considered view of Anthony Robbins, who has helped shape the communication strategies of some of the world�s most successful businesses, this approach is essential to successful persuasion: ��Everything I know about communication tells me to build from agreement, not from conflict,�� he insists. FRENCH EXAMPLE Well, before I had finished reading Unlimited Power, I found myself assessing the potential for harnessing some of the major principles of �Aikido Politics� to the cause of nationalist politics. And then it dawned on me that I had actually read, only a short time before, an account of how a modern nationalist political party had indeed applied such principles with tremendously successful results. The party in question was France�s Front National, led by Jean-Marie Le Pen. As far back as the 1960s in fact, the early pioneers of the French Front National had recognised the NLP principle that only effective communication could lead to political power, and that such communication was possible only by the development of sophisticated tactical flexibility. In 1962, for example, the French Nationalist thinker Dominique Venner, writing in D�fense de l�Occident, called for an end to the ideological rigidity which prevented both the unity of French Nationalism and its popular appeal. In future, she insisted, ��(the) political struggle must be waged more through the use of ideas and artfulness.�� From its creation in 1972, therefore, the strategy of the Front National has been based around a flexible communication policy, both in its internal organisation and outward politicking. The adoption of a rigid ideological stance has been carefully avoided in order to provide a common umbrella within which the previous disparate elements within French Nationalism could join together and break out of the political ghetto. Only such flexibility has allowed a professional and unified party to develop from superficially diverse groups, ranging from Catholic traditionalists to pagans, and from former resistance fighters to wartime supporters of the Vichy regime. MODERN METHODS Likewise, the party made an early decision to divest itself of outdated and limiting political language and imagery in order to enable it to develop into a more modern force able to attract a much wider audience. The idea was not to retreat - in any case impossible for a movement at the very bottom of the political pile - but to advance in a different direction through the employment of flexible communication strategies. This approach was summed up in 1979 by a leading French nationalist Maurice Bardeche as a ��realpolitik of the Right,�� which was ��the only route which remains open to us to leave the ghetto in which (we are) trapped.�� It was certainly only through the adoption of such tactics that the Front National was able to reap the dividends of the inroads made by the Nouvelle Droite (New Right) intellectual movement, which emerged during the 1970s. Based upon a cultural approach to politics which sought to transcend traditional party partisanship, this tactic was correctly perceived as helping to enable French Nationalism to move beyond traditional areas of influence and into the political mainstream. In fact, the New Right arena provided a bridge between the mainstream conservative and liberal parties and nationalist ideas over which several individuals, currently senior FN figures, passed. In the early 1980s the FN�s flexible communication strategy reaped further dividends when the party captured the Club de l�Horloge, a Gaullist think- tank led by Yvan Blot, then an influential member of the Gaullist party, and JeanYves le Gallou, then prominent in the Republican Party, both of whom passed over into the ranks of the FN. Perhaps the most important catch resulting from such tactics, however, was Bruno Megret, effectively the FN�s current second-in-command. Megret was a member of the RPR�s central committee and even served in the ministerial private office of Robert Galleg prior to the Socialist victory of 1981. In 1985, in the wake of the development of strong informal links, his Republican Action Committee merged with the Front National. SOPHISTICATION Megret has developed further the sophistication of the FN�s communication tactics. Indeed, in accord with the findings of the Neuro Linguistic Programming pioneers relating to the importance of presentation to any human success and, in particular, to the theory that effective persuasion is best achieved by the use of moderate, uncontroversial verbal and physiological language, he has striven to give the FN a more moderate and less abrasive image. In an interview in 1993, for example, he used such an approach in describing his party:- ��We are not on the extreme Right, because overall our ideas are moderate. I say that they are traditional ideas, and what has actually happened is that the whole of the political class has shifted towards the Left. Those who have remained faithful to themselves on the centre-Right today find themselves on the extreme Right of the board. But this is an optical illusion, not a real political position.�� Even Jonathan Marcus, the anti-FN author of the highly informative The Front National and French Politics: the Resistible Rise of Jean-Marie Le Pen (Macmillan, 1995), has recognised the uniqueness of the FN�s communicative success and political maturity. He admits in fact that by acting in such a manner the party represents something much more than simply a resurgence of a long-standing current in French politics running back through the collaboration of Vichy Vichy to the fascist leagues of the 1930s, and has actually revolutionised the potential of French Nationalism. ��What distinguishes Le Pen,�� Marcus points out, ��quite apart from his ability to build and maintain a cohesive and well-rooted political party on the Far Right is his self-proclaimed acceptance of not just the electoral path to power but of the parliamentary system itself.�� Marcus has also admitted that, by employing a sophisticated form of political language semantics, the FN has been highly successful in throwing derogatory labels back in the faces of its opponents. Actually, in line with the NLP theory, the FN has shaped its communication strategy in a manner which, where and when possible, produces the least amount of resistance in ordinary French people. RECOGNISING DIVERSITY A presentation of the FN�s beliefs that could be misunderstood or easily categorized by political opponents as an unrealistic and confrontational �racism�, gave way to a practical, subtle and mature exposition of the right of the peoples of mankind to their own ethnic and cultural identity. Consider Jean-Marie Le Pen's refined affirmation of the FN�s opposition to mass immigration into France:- ��In this world where different races, different ethnic groups and different cultures exist, I take note of this diversity and this variety.�� Rather than run chest-bared, Kamikaze-style, full steam into hostile accusations of �racism�, the FN has regularly cleverly side-stepped such attacks and turned them on their head. This approach was summed up by Yvan Blot, who in 1993 pointed out, quite logically, that it was actually the philosophy of �anti-racism� which was motivated by hatred, as it was ��based upon a hatred of races which are seen as being obstacles to a perfect unity of mankind.�� Such thinking has even extended to the creation of an FN group for patriotic French Jews - the Cercle National des Juifs Fran�ais - headed by an Algerian-born Jewish ex-serviceman and FN municipal councillor. This, Jonathan Marcus argues, ��displays another tactic of the Front and its associated organisations: the inversion of charges of racism,�� which, as he further points out, has served to confuse and weaken the FN�s opponents, undermine anti-FN resistance, and widen the party�s appeal and influence. The Front National has certainly been quick to realise the value of the tenet, taught as a central plank of Neuro Linguistic Programming, that a failed communication is usually the result of deficiencies in the communication itself, and that the solution is not to reject aggressively all possibility of persuading the subject - thus becoming even less likely to achieve success - but to reshape the communication in order to make it more appealing to the targeted audience. Le Pen's party has in fact put into practice the NLP theory of �pacing and leading�, based upon the idea that a gradual and subtle degree of bridge-building ingratiation in a potentially hostile environment cannot only result in a breaking down of barriers but can eventually lead to an idea that was once attacked as being beyond the pale being accepted and taken up by the former attackers. Through this method, moreover, the process of successful persuasion and legitimacy becomes self-perpetuating. SETTING THE AGENDA This has been witnessed in the way in which the FN has been increasingly able in recent years to set the political agenda on the immigration question. Between 1986 and 1988, in the wake of the FN�s first major electoral breakthrough, and again after 1993, French Interior Minister Charles Pasqua actually advocated a policy of winning back FN voters by talking tough on immigration and other issues. By this time, however, the FN�s ascent into the political mainstream had already been achieved and Pasqua�s efforts merely served to consolidate its position. In the view of one disgruntled, anti-FN commentator, the result of such such a process has been that over the last twelve years France has witnessed a ��normalisation of racist rhetoric.�� Such �pacing and leading� also seems to have proved successful for the FN in its attempt to persuade the people of France that it represents a fresh and original force in French politics with the ability to unite the nation across traditional party political boundaries. Bruno Megret has long argued that the old distinctions between Left and Right in France are no longer relevant and that while previously the French political process was a debate between Marxists and liberals over the social and economic organisation of a country it was now solely ��between nationalism and cosmopolitanism, between identity and internationalism.�� And perception does indeed seem to have become reality in that, unlike other parties, the FN appeals to voters across the traditional political spectrum. Jonathan Marcus has commented that the FN�s electorate, at least sociologically, seems to stand somewhere between Left and Right - the result not of the �extreme Right� expanding but of the FN broadening its appeal beyond the traditional boundaries of French Nationalism. LESSONS FOR US So what does all of this mean for the future of British Nationalism, and for the BNP in particular? Well, one of the most important ideas behind Neuro Linguistic Programming is the theory of �modelling�. This is based upon the belief that success in any area of life can be achieved by taking the time to model those who have already succeeded in that particular area. Learning from the advances of others, after all, is one of the most fundamental aspects of all human progress. In the world of technology, for example, every advance in engineering or computer design follows naturally from earlier discoveries. In the business world also, companies which fail to take account of the experience of others very rarely prosper. Politics is no exception, and the BNP must fully appreciate this reality if it is to progress to the required heights of political power in this country. Such a process must entail, not a blind copying of the Front National, but a flexible acceptance of certain fundamental truths of successful human communication and persuasion. In fact, the BNP does not necessarily have to look to the FN experience for proof of the effectiveness of such principles. At the local level, the party has already proved their validity by using them to bring about its most important political success to date: the election in 1993 of a local councillor to MilIwall ward in Tower Hamlets. It is now generally accepted by informed opinion that the MilIwall victory was made possible by local leaders taking full advantage of local conditions to initiate a skilful strategy of bridge-building and ingratiation with local white residents which resulted not only in the legitimisation of the BNP as a major force in local politics but as the deserving representative of the white community as a whole. The key to this process of �pacing and leading�, moreover, was the employment of a communication strategy whichproduced a high degree of rapport and a low level of hostile resistance in local people.FIGHT FOR RECOGNITION This fact has been emphasised in a book which came out in 1997 on the history of British nationalism�s fight for political recognition. Edited by Mike Cronin, a lecturer at the University of Sheffield, and misleadingly titled The Failure of British Fascism, chapter seven of the book, written by Nigel Copsey, is devoted to the BNP and provides a very interesting interpretation of why the party�s �Rights for Whites� campaign in Tower Hamlets was so successful. Significantly, Copsey criticises previous media and academic interpretations for not recognising that to a large extent the BNP earned its victory in MilIwall by the use of skilful communication tactics and so ��brought itself�� into the local political mainstream. As Copsey points out, ��... the quasi-liberal discourse of �Defend Rights for Whites�, with accompanying appeals for �Justice�, identified the BNP with a ��public-spirited campaign,�� while its rational, �liberal� discourse seemingly divorced the BNP from the irrational, injudicious extremism of fascism.�� And, he goes on, ��the BNP�s message was �reasonable� and �unextreme�: the rights of white residents had to be defended in the areas which affect everyday lives.�� Copsey also recognises the fact, pointed out out earlier in relation to the experience of France�s Front National, that the success produced by these tactics becomes self- perpetuating. In the case of Tower Hamlets, he points out, the attempts of the Liberal- Democrats to hang on to local white voters,increasingly attracted to the BNP, by talking tough on BNP issues actually helped to legitimise the mainstream discussion of immigration- related issues and open up further legitimate political space for the BNP. Then, in the run up to the MilIwall victory, the BNP gained further political ground by merely bringing the genuineness of the Liberal- Democrats� convictions on these issues into doubt. MYTH It is a widespread myth in British nationalist circles that the failure of the National Front to make an electoral breakthrough at the 1979 British general election resulted from Margaret Thatcher�s famous public statement that a Conservative Government under her leadership would not allow Britain to be �swamped� by peoples from different cultures. If anything, however, given the impetus which Charles Pasqua gave to the success of the Front National in France, and which Tower Hamlets Liberal Democrats gave to the success of the BNP, Thatcher�s statement should have provided the NF with a springboard into the political mainstream. The reason that this didn�t happen, and the reason that tens of thousands of potential voters flooded hack to the Tories, was because the NF had a substantial image problem which a flawed national communication strategy merely served to exacerbate. Nigel Copsey believes that the legitimate political space which opened up for the NF in the late 1970s could open up again for the BNP in the late 1990s, particularly if Immigration-related issues are mismanaged at the national level. He insists, however, that the only plausible way in which the BNP could consolidate this space would be if it adopted the �careful nationalism� of France�s Front National. Only by employing such tactics would the BNP be able to attract a wider-level support and dissipate �fascist� smear campaigns by elements of the media. Of course, it might be easy to contradict such thinking by arguing that the media will always be hostile to any form of organised British patriotism and that the BNP will always be smeared with the �fascist� tag regardless of the reality of the situation. But this kind of absolutist pessimism is incorrect and self-defeating. While undoubtedly biased against us, the media are actually made up of thousands of individuals many of whom can be influenced if they are fed the right kind of communications. Michael Newland proved this when as BNP Press Officer he succeeded in bringing about a marked improvement in the objectivity with which the party was treated by the media - largely by the intelligent, moderate and accommodating manner in which he presented the party�s case. Whether they realised it or not - and whether they consciously desired it or not - the image of the BNP which became established in the minds of these people through such presentation was positive rather than negative, and this was inevitably reflected in their subsequent reporting where the derogatory terms �fascist� or �nazi, commonly used previously to describe the BNP, were invariably dropped in favour of the much more friendlier �far-right� or �ultra-nationalist�.GENERAL ELECTION The BNP leadership�s decision to fight over 50 seats in last year�s general election, so ensuring the party�s right to national TV and radio broadcasts, also highlights the possibility of what can be achieved by the party adopting a flexible communication strategy. The media debate which the broadcast stimulated could only confirm the fact that the party had taken a large step towards the political mainstream, and the mature, reasonable and moderate impression made by John Tyndall in the broadcast itself has been vindicated in the new avenues of influence which are now opening up for the BNP. This reality was highlighted further for me when I participated in the BNP�s hugely successful activity at the Countryside March in London on March 1st. The positive response of thousands of high- quality people to the party�s British Countryman broadsheet was a reflection not only of Nick Griffin�s tactical astuteness in what he wrote in it but of the level of support the BNP could attract among the discontented millions of �Middle Britain� if it gets its communication strategy right. British Countryman encapsulated in its four major principles the aspirations of millions of patriotic Britons who are looking for a political home, and it stands to reason, therefore, that the same principles should encapsulate everything to which the BNP itself aspires in the coming years. In everything we say and do, through our total image, we must present ourselves nationally as the party of Democracy against Plutocracy, of Freedom against Euro-tyranny, of Security against Fear, and of Identity against Multi-culturalism. Only one woman on the Countryside March acted in an outwardly hostile manner towards my group as we gave out thousands of broadsheets, and she skulked away dumbfounded as I gently ticked her off in front of an audience of hundreds for behaving like a fascist and a totalitarian who wanted to undermine British democracy and freedom in the same way as the people responsible for the policies she was supposedly marching against! The success of British Countryman is further confirmation of the reality that all political persuasion requires an altering of perception and is thus, inevitably, a battle of image. A battle of image, moreover, necessitates a level of tactical flexibility which allows the employment of as many different approaches as it takes to achieve success, and the rejection of absolutist and circumscribed attitudes which can only ever guarantee frustration and failure. By fighting fifty five seats at the last General Election, and in the decision to contest enough seats at the 1999 Euro-elections so as to gain further national TV and radio broadcasts, the BNP has demonstrated its commitment to establishing itself as a legitimate presence in this country�s political structure. The time has never been more right for the party to embrace more fully the principles of �Aikido Politics� so as to propel it further and permanently into the political mainstream.
