Free Speech Directory || National Alliance Main Page
After last week's broadcast a listener commented that the people who pretend to be shocked by Atlanta Braves pitcher John Rocker's expression of distaste for the denizens of Times Square and the New York subways are the same people who will never give an honest explanation of why they have fled the cities for the suburbs or small towns. The outflow of White families from the cities -- the so-called "White flight" -- is the direct consequence of the influx of non-Whites into the cities. The Whites are desperate to get away from the non-Whites -- but not one in 20 will admit it. They believe that everyone around them will condemn them if they do admit it. They are so terrified of being thought "racists" that many of them won't even admit the truth to themselves. Instead they invent a Politically Acceptable reason for their flight: the schools are better in the suburbs because of the higher teachers' salaries, the suburbs provide easier access to the shopping malls, or whatever.
How is this illusion maintained? Almost entirely through the Jewish control of the mass media of news and entertainment. Most people -- most White Americans, anyway -- like to believe that they observe the world around them and then come to objective conclusions about things. They like to believe that they are rational individuals. They like to believe that they are independent thinkers. And of course, a few of them are -- but most of them, about 95 per cent of them -- aren't. They are conformists. They conform their opinions, their thinking, their attitudes, to what they believe is expected of them.
Consider religion, as an example. People are not Baptists or Lutherans or Roman Catholics or Muslims because they have examined the various religious doctrines, compared them, and then made a rational decision. In 98 per cent of the cases one is a Lutheran or a Catholic or a Muslim or a Buddhist because one's parents and the other people in one's community are. A thoughtful person who takes his religion seriously may be prepared to argue about it and to defend cleverly the merits of his particular sect against the claims of a different sect, but the fact remains that his adherence to his own sect is not based on an independent decision. It was based from the beginning on conforming his beliefs to the perceived beliefs of the people around him. All of his arguments are only attempts to rationalize what in the first place was not rational. Think about it, and I'm sure you'll agree with me.
It works a little differently with other types of belief, but the psychology, the human element, remains the same. In America the government and the mass media don't take a position favoring one Christian sect over another or even a position favoring Christianity over Buddhism or Islam, say. The pressure to conform in religious matters must come from family and neighbors. But in political ideology the pressure to conform comes very much from the government and even more from the mass media. And when I say pressure comes from the government, I mean all government-controlled institutions, including especially the schools. All of the media and all of the government institutions promote the belief that mass democracy, American style -- television style -- is the best possible form of government.
Beyond this they promote the beliefs that men and women are essentially the same, except for the configuration of their genitalia, and that it is "unfair" to treat them differently in any way; that homosexuals are just like heterosexuals except for a different sexual orientation, and that it is "bigoted" to treat them differently in any way; that Jews are clever and witty people, good at business, but honest and also sensitive and caring, and it is "hateful" to have any other ideas about them; and that Blacks and other non-Whites may look different, but under the skin they are just like us -- in particular, they are just as intelligent, just as creative, just as good at solving problems, and just as inclined to accept personal responsibility.
Now, whether you personally believe these things or not, I think you'll agree with me that the government and the mass media do push quite hard for conformity to these beliefs. For example, have you ever seen any television news program showing people using computers -- children with computers in a classroom, say -- in which a Black wasn't shown at the keyboard? I mean, it's like there is a rule that all news program directors must follow: you cannot show a computer unless you show a Black at the keyboard. It's transparently obvious that they are pushing the idea that computers and Blacks go together, like blackeyed peas and collard greens. That's what they want the public to believe.
The reality, of course, is that computers are a White thing and always have been: the invention, the engineering, the programming, you name it. Blacks just aren't involved. You can teach a Black to use a computer, of course, just as you can teach a chimpanzee to ride a bicycle. But computers remain in the White domain, just as bicycles remain in the human domain. And that's certainly not because anyone is holding Blacks back. It's a matter of aptitude and inclination. Chinamen certainly are capable of understanding the science involved, which is why under the Clinton policy of globalizing the economy much of the computer technology we developed is moving to China, and we're now forced to buy some computer products from the Chinese. But if you ever see computer products being imported from Ghana or Zambia it will only be because someone who is not a Black has built a factory there to take advantage of the cheap labor. It will not be because a Black computer whiz in Africa has developed something on his own.
You know, most people understand this at a certain level. They know that this business of always showing Blacks at computer keyboards is a media trick, but they have a hard time resisting it. They feel a compulsion to believe that the illusion is real.
The same trick is used in other ways. If NASA has a public announcement to make about one of its scientific space probes, the chances are pretty good there will be a Black chosen to stand in front of the television cameras, make the announcement, and explain to us the science involved -- unless, of course, there has been a screwup and the space probe failed to do what it was supposed to do. Then it's OK to have a White spokesman. Or if the National Institutes of Health or the Food and Drug Administration has something important to tell us, a Black in a white lab coat will be trotted out for the cameras. The idea is to create the illusion that technology and science and progress and intelligence are associated somehow with Blacks -- or at least, that Blacks are just as good at that sort of thing as we are.
And as I already mentioned, it's difficult to resist this sort of illusion. One cannot turn on a television set or pick up a mass-circulation magazine these days without seeing Blacks presented to us in White roles as if it were the most natural thing in the world. Flip through the channels, and you see Black face after Black face, and the smiling Whites all around them always are approving. Black doctors, Black businessmen, Black teachers, Black scientists, Black comedians, Black singers, Black dancers, Black announcers, Black ball players, Black detectives, Black men running off with White girls, and all the Whites around them smiling and approving. It's almost hypnotic.
But you know, it is an illusion. The smiling Whites who are so approving of the Blacks are being paid to smile. The Whites in the television audience aren't being paid, of course, but it's difficult for them to resist smiling too. It's a very primitive but very strong impulse, this need to laugh when those around you are laughing, to smile when everyone else is smiling. The television bosses understand this impulse perfectly, and they use it effectively.
And it's not just in the United States that this illusion is being promoted. The mass media and the democratic politicians in Germany have been collaborating with the Jews for the past 55 years in an effort to foster a similar illusion in the public consciousness of the German people. The Germans always have believed that there was something special about being German, about being born of German parents. Every German inherited through his genes something of the greatness of his nation, its history, its genius.
Of course, the French and the Russians and the English and the Irish have similar beliefs about their own nations. It's an ethnic thing -- but very undemocratic: something which the Jews and their collaborators have been trying hard to stamp out. So shortly after the beginning of this year, early on New Year's Day, German collaborators chose a newborn baby to be the "German of the Millennium." And of course, they didn't choose a German baby for this distinction; they chose a Turkish baby, born in a German hospital to two Turkish "guest workers." And for the past week politicians and the media people have been holding up this Turkish baby to television audiences in Germany as a typical German of the new millennium, and all of the collaborators and paid media people on the screen at the same time have smiled proudly whenever this announcement has been made. And unfortunately, all too many German television viewers have smiled along with them. That's the way our people are. And so the German public gradually begins falling victim to this carefully engineered illusion that Turks and Gypsies and Pakistanis and Zulus born in Germany are really Germans, just like all other Germans.
I've spoken of the Jewish power structure shielded by this illusion as a "house of cards." That's a reasonable term to use, I believe, but let's try now to understand it a little better. If tonight Washington and New York City and Hollywood all were devastated by massive earthquakes -- if most of the people and the institutions which generate and maintain the illusion in America -- suddenly were destroyed, the house of cards would not immediately come tumbling down. In fact, the illusion would not instantly be replaced by a clear view of reality. Illusions have a tendency to persist for a while. People who were deceived by the illusion would continue deceiving themselves for a while; they would continue clinging to the illusion. Many people would need guidance in freeing themselves from the illusion and gaining a firm grasp on reality. Providing that guidance would be a far easier task and require much less work than the work the Jews and their collaborators have put into building the illusion. The truth does have its advantages. But still, uprooting the illusion and pulling down the house of cards would not be something that could be accomplished overnight.
There's another important consideration: the organizational consideration. If a minority wants to maintain its control over a majority -- especially if a substantial number of the members of that majority don't want to be controlled -- then the controlling minority needs to have an effective organizational structure through which to exercise its control. The organizational structure provides the necessary leverage which a numerical minority needs in order to control an unwilling majority.
Well, that's pretty simple and obvious, I guess, but it's still something to think about in coming to an understanding of our situation. The rule is this: the larger the disparity in numbers, the more the organizational leverage that is required; and the greater the leverage needed, the less is the stability. Which is why the Jews are pushing a number of long-range programs to decrease our numbers, both absolutely and in relation to the feminists, homosexuals, non-Whites, and the others in their camp. At the moment their situation is still quite precarious, in that without governmental compulsion they could not maintain their control; illusion alone would not hold their house of cards up.
At this time, however, they have both: they have the machinery of illusion in their hands, and they have organizational leverage. And they need both. If someone could put a big enough monkey wrench into the gears of the illusion machinery to shut it down for an extended period, the leverage would become very shaky indeed. The politicians and the bureaucrats and the secret police agencies and the military people don't do the will of the Jews because they love the Jews. They do it because they are part of an organization, part of the governmental establishment. Their paychecks come from the government, and they are hoping that one day their pensions also will come from the government. But the government itself still is based on the idea of popular support, on the idea of elections and votes. When the illusion machinery is no longer available to control the votes, the politicians will be making new calculations, and so will the head bureaucrats. In every case it will be their own advantage they will be seeking, of course. Patriotism is a thing of the past.
On the other hand, if a big enough monkey wrench could be thrown into the government's gears, then even a fairly small number of determined people could wreck the illusion machinery, and I believe it's not necessary for me to explain how that could be done. But now the government and the illusion machinery support each other, and I don't know of anyone who has a big enough monkey wrench to shut down either of them. That's a shortcoming to which we must address ourselves.
Anyway, do you remember the miniature civil war in Russia back in the early part of the Yeltsin era, in September and October 1993? That was just six years ago. Boris Yeltsin, of course, was the candidate of the Jews -- sort of the Bill Clinton of Russia. He had been elected only with the all-out support of the mass media -- especially the television networks, which then as now were under the tight control of the Jews, most notably Boris Berezovsky and Vladimir Gussinsky. Progressive Russian patriots, along with conservative elements from the earlier era, tried to take the organizational machinery away from Yeltsin -- which is to say, away from the Jews. The Russian legislature -- the Duma -- voted to depose Yeltsin, but without anyone to take his place immediately the Army and the KGB continued to take their orders from him.
Patriots stormed the Russian parliament building in Moscow and also the main television station there. They broke through the troops around the parliament building, the so-called White House, seized the building, and barricaded themselves inside. They did not succeed in taking the main television station, however, because the KGB had its toughest troops -- its elite troops -- guarding the place. They were far more concerned about protecting the television headquarters -- about maintaining their hold on the machinery of illusion -- than they were about holding onto the White House and its legislative machinery. When the patriots tried to storm Berezovsky's television station, the KGB troops simply machine-gunned them, and they died in the streets. Keeping the population entranced with the usual television fare, it was then a simple matter to send tanks against the White House. Yeltsin had the Russian Army shelling the White House with tanks to drive out the patriots. And so Yeltsin and his gang -- which is to say, the Jews -- were able to hang onto power. How different it might have been if the Russian patriots had succeeded in taking over the machinery of illusion at the same time they were barricaded in the White House! A day or two of control of Russian television by a crew of intelligent patriots could have been enough to bring hundreds of thousands of ordinary Russians into the streets and also to cause the Army and KGB bosses to make new calculations.
We might also note that organizational leverage works at the international level pretty much as it works at the national level. During the 1993 crisis in Russia, the Jews and their collaborators over here were sweating the outcome. I don't know what threats and promises were made behind the scenes, but I can imagine. It's clear that any small country, without nuclear weapons, that doesn't take orders will get the same treatment Serbia got. It would have been quite a bit more difficult for the Jews if things had gone better for the patriots in Russia in 1993. And things still may take a turn for the better in Russia. Certainly, even a nuclear war, if it unhinges the leverage or wrecks the machinery of illusion, will be better than a continuation of the present course of events. The best chance for avoiding a nuclear war, however, and also for unhinging the Jews' international leverage, would be to put a big enough monkey wrench into the organizational machinery here so that the U.S. government cannot exercise the Jews' will against any other country using cruise missiles, the way it did against Iraq and Serbia.
Well, all of my talk today hasn't provided anything in the way of a concrete plan of action, but perhaps it may help us focus our thinking a little better when we do work out a plan. For now what we must do is continue reaching our people in every way we can. I'll be happy to have your help in this endeavor.
Free Speech Directory || National Alliance Main Page