Free Speech Directory || National Alliance Main Page
I must confess to you, however, that I myself usually learn more from reading my hate mail than I do from reading friendly letters. The most common type of hate letter I receive is from Politically Correct college girls of both sexes. They all have pretty much the same flavor: "Ooooh, my god! How can you be soooo stupid as to believe that skin color makes any difference! Don't you realize that we're in the 21st century now? Your ideas went out of fashion with the Stone Age. I can't believe that there are still people like you around. You should sell your trailer, get your teeth fixed, and go to school. Maybe you would learn something!"
Well, you may wonder what is useful in reading letters of this sort. Actually, they serve primarily as a constant reminder to me that there are many lemmings out there. Some of the lemmings lecture me about the things they have learned in class or from television about race and history and world affairs, and you'd be amazed at some of the things they've been taught and actually believe. But that's useful too. It reminds me that reason plays a negligible role in the belief system of these people, and it does very little good to attempt to use reason in straightening out their thinking. In order to move them we must go beyond reason; we must appeal to their most fundamental primate instincts.
Well, when we own a major Hollywood studio or a television network, we can generate the images that appeal to the instincts of the lemmings. Then we can compete with the Jews in the business of manipulating their instincts. For now, while we are limited to words and reason, there's not much point in addressing ourselves to the lemmings. For now, we can speak effectively only to the two per cent or so of the population that is susceptible to reason. And I really am interested in knowing what's on the minds of this two per cent. I do want to know what the people who are capable of thinking are thinking -- and feeling -- as our civilization crumbles and our race slips into the abyss of extinction. Because, you know, even though we can't win any elections with just this two per cent, we can win the war . . . if we can get most of them -- or even half of them -- properly oriented and properly motivated.
So what are the things that are keeping that thinking two per cent from getting their act together? Well, one thing is conservatism. Many people still can't let go of the notion that we must solve our problems in a civilized and orderly way, like ladies and gentlemen. Well, you know, we lost that option a long time ago. Really, all you have to do is look around. Go out into the street. Go into any big city supermarket or shopping mall. Look at the people. They are the voters: the 400-pound welfare moms, and the Mexicans and Vietnamese who've been here long enough to become citizens, and the beer-bellied baseball and basketball fans -- the sort of people one sees on Oprah and the Jerry Springer Show. The ladies and gentlemen of America can't outvote them. We can't save our people or our civilization by playing according to the old rules. We can't win by being ladies and gentlemen. We have to use our heads, of course, but we also must at least be willing to get down and dirty when necessary. We must be willing to break every old rule and to make new ones.
I remember what it was like living in a world where most people respected the old rules. I remember White neighborhoods, where mothers stayed home and took care of their children, and White schools . . . and even White shopping malls, believe it or not. It was a world in which ladies and gentlemen ran things, and it was a much cleaner and more decent world. It had its faults, of course. I found it a little too stuffy and prudish and restrictive, but it was an infinitely better world for our people than this Clinton-era world. The biggest problem with that civilized, White world of 50 years ago was that even then the rules were way out of date. The rules were no longer able to protect our society from our deadliest enemies, who had found ways around the rules. They were able to infiltrate and subvert every institution of ours.
We clung to meaningless rules -- we clung to civility and politeness and table manners and dressing properly and other outward forms -- while they corrupted and subverted from within. It was considered rude to point to the corrupters and subverters. We may not have admitted many of the brasher and pushier New York and Hollywood Jews into our society, but we thought it was all right to admit the ones who had learned to dress and talk like us, the ones who had learned our manners and could pretend to be ladies and gentlemen. Our polite and civilized society carried within itself the seeds of its own destruction.
And even today the conservatives cannot let go of it. They are so enamored of its rotted-out hulk that the stink of its decay doesn't discourage them. But, still -- I can remember the time when I too didn't understand where the stink was coming from, and so I believe that there are some conservatives who still are worth talking with, some who still can learn to let go.
And then there are the liberals -- or rather, what I call the "incidental" liberals, in order to distinguish them from the intrinsic liberals. Incidental liberals are people who accept liberal policies only because they don't understand. They aren't lemmings, but they have nevertheless let themselves be misinformed to the point that they might as well be lemmings. They've simply absorbed what they've been taught in school and by the controlled media about all the races being inherently equal in ability and morality, about differences in individual and group achievement being due entirely to differences in environment and in opportunity, about the only difference between Jews and everyone else being a matter of religion, and so on.
It's not that they feel a need to believe these things because of some psychological trauma caused by faulty potty training, as is the case with the intrinsic liberals. It's just that they never questioned what they were told. Perhaps they grew up in a rural area or a small town which was essentially White and Gentile and so didn't see the glaring contradictions between reality and what they were taught. Perhaps they just aren't very perceptive. Perhaps hearing sophomore college girls squeal, "Ooooh, my god! How can you be soooo stupid!" whenever someone violated a taboo of Political Correctness has made them gun shy: they haven't wanted to risk becoming an object of ridicule themselves.
What folks like this need is a good, big dose of reality. Sometimes moving to a big city will do the job. Sometimes military service will clear up the problem. I've had a number of letters from people in the Army who've confessed to me that until recently they had believed much of the television propaganda about racial equality, and it wasn't until they'd had a chance to experience the wonders of the colored brother up close and had gagged on the experience that they realized they had been lied to and began looking for the truth. But you must remember that these people aren't real liberals. A real liberal will continue making excuses for Blacks even after going through basic training with them in the Army. A real liberal will flee from the reality of life with Blacks in the big city but even after reaching the safety of a Whiter area will not admit why he fled. Real liberals need more than a dose of reality to straighten out their thinking. They need an experience at least as traumatic as whatever it was that went wrong during their potty training. They'll get it, but it may come too late to do much good.
And there are the individualists. I've spoken about them in earlier broadcasts. They are the folks who believe that they are properly oriented and properly motivated when they are focused entirely on looking out for Number One. You talk to them about the danger America is in, the danger the race is in, and they look at you as if you're crazy. They're thinking, "What does that have to do with me?" The brighter individualists are capable of understanding that the mess all of us -- including them -- are in now is the consequence of too much individualist thinking in the past, of too many people shirking their responsibility for the race. Even so, they look at the situation around them today, and their first thought is, "It's every man for himself!" It's no wonder that the enemies of our people extol the virtues of individualist thinking and hold out individualist teachers and "philosophers," such as the Jewess Ayn Rand, for us to follow.
About the only way to get any useful cooperation out of an individualist is to convince him that the danger we all face is so imminent that it really is a matter of hanging together or hanging separately: that the situation is deteriorating so rapidly that he cannot escape the consequences of egalitarianism and multiculturalism and Clintonism run wild by acting entirely on his own. He must be convinced that his own immediate self-interest is tied to the welfare and survival of his people. But that's becoming an easier proposition all the time. Ten years ago even an intelligent and farsighted individualist might reasonably believe that the deluge wouldn't come until after his lifetime, and so it was not his concern. Today, finding it hard to get air even standing on tiptoe, he is not so sure that the flood will wait, and he is much more amenable to reason.
So our task is to continue to build understanding and motivation among the thinking portion of our people: to persuade the conservatives to let go by showing them where the stink is coming from, to show them that the corpse they are clinging to really is dead; to educate the incidental liberals by helping them see the facts they have overlooked; to make the individualists understand that individualism just doesn't make sense at a time when the tide is carrying our boat farther and farther from the safe harbor we all seek, and it is clear that we will only get there if we all row together.
Perhaps I am just an unrealistic optimist to believe that we can do these things. But I myself have been to all of these places I've talked about. I used to be a conservative. And I used to believe that Jews were just like all the rest of us except that they went to a different church; I believed that the reason Blacks behaved badly and had never accomplished much was that they had had a bad break, that they hadn't had a fair chance. And I even went through an individualist phase, when I thought I was so much smarter than everyone else that I could manage by myself; I hadn't explored my roots yet -- I hadn't understood yet that I am only a very small part of something much bigger and more important than myself.
And because I came through all of these things, all of these errors, I believe that others can too. In fact, I know they can, because I see the proof of it in my mail every day. And I know that these broadcasts are helping them. We just need to do more than we're doing now: more radio stations, a bigger audience, more effective use of all our media, not just radio, and the development of new media. We need to continue building our communications infrastructure as rapidly as we can. We need to recruit more help for that task, just like I need to recruit a secretary.
We're getting there. We're reaching more of our people every day. We just need to move faster, and one of these days we'll be able to begin having an effect on the lemmings too. We'll be able to begin appealing to basic instincts. We'll even have some of those sophomore college girls changing their tune about what's stupid and what isn't.
So let's reiterate now the basics of what we're up against, the basic elements of our present predicament. First, we are in the midst of a demographic disaster of unprecedented magnitude. The racial composition of America is changing more rapidly and more profoundly than the population of any major country ever has changed in peacetime. In 1950 the population of the United States was 90 per cent White. Today it is only 70 per cent White. That's a tripling of the percentage of non-Whites in just 50 years. If present trends continue, in just another 40 years Whites will be less than 50 per cent of the population. We'll be a minority in our own country. That is a fact that is not even under dispute. The Clintonistas are crowing about it. They are looking forward with glee to an America in which Whites no longer are a majority as much as we are dreading it.
Not even the causes of this demographic disaster are under dispute. The White birthrate has fallen below the replacement level, while non-White birthrates remain high -- and the flood of new immigrants, both legal and illegal, pouring across our borders is mostly non-White, which is why the Clintonistas are determined to keep the borders open. On top of everything else, the rate of miscegenation between Whites and non-Whites is skyrocketing, as the mass media and the government and the mainstream Christian churches do everything they can to encourage racial mixing and mongrelization. This is the physical aspect of our problem.
We also are in the midst of a moral disaster. I hardly need to tell you that the willingness of the American electorate to tolerate the sort of scandalous behavior we have seen in the Clinton administration is as unprecedented as the demographic changes which are taking place. I mean, there was a time not so long ago when it would have been unthinkable to have as a major presidential candidate a man who as governor of a state was in the habit of sending out the state police to scout up women for him and bring them to the governor's mansion for his sexual pleasure or who had a brother conducting a flourishing trade in illegal cocaine sales from an office in the governor's mansion and got caught doing it and convicted and sent to prison. It used to be that that sort of behavior just wasn't tolerable. But now, as long as people's credit cards are good, they don't seem to mind. They're quite willing to have a piece of smiling, charming filth like Bill Clinton as their President, as long as their refrigerators are full and there are plenty of ball games on TV. Half of the electorate don't care that their President is a perjurer and a rapist and a user of illegal drugs who solicits campaign contributions from foreign powers. Half don't care, and the other half don't care enough to do anything about it as long as the economy seems superficially healthy. That is a moral disaster, and it is unprecedented.
The public displays of homosexuality and the acceptance of homosexual behavior in our universities and elsewhere also are unprecedented. So is the extent to which feminism influences public policy. So is the extent to which our men have become effeminate wimps.
Finally, we are in the midst of a political disaster, or perhaps it would be more accurate to call it a power disaster. We have a political system, an electoral system, which for all practical purposes is controlled by the people who control the mass media: in particular, television. No candidate for national or even state office can be elected without television. The average voter sees and hears the candidates only on his television screen. That's his only way of knowing the candidates, his only way of making a choice. This is unprecedented.
Prior to about 1922, when commercial radio broadcasting began to become a significant medium, voters learned about candidates only by hearing them speak in person at local public meetings or by reading about them in newspapers. Even then, of course, the personal bias of a big-city newspaper owner could make a substantial difference in a candidate's chance of being elected. But at least, in those days there were a number of newspapers with various owners in every big city. With the increasing importance of radio broadcasting during the 1920s and 1930s, with the accumulation of newspapers in fewer and fewer hands, and with the advent of commercial television broadcasting after the Second Wold War, the relationship between candidates for public office and voters changed in a radical way.
Today the Jews' monopoly control of the mass media gives them the sort of political power that newspaper owners and ward bosses couldn't even dream about 75 years ago. Worse, it is a hidden power. The average voter doesn't see it. He doesn't even know who the big media bosses are. He just sees the faces on his television screen and doesn't think about how they got there. But the politicians certainly think about it. The politicians understand whom they must please and whom they dare not offend in order to receive favorable TV coverage. They understand which policies they must support and which laws they must pass in order to remain in favor with the media bosses.
So those are the three major disasters that have befallen our people and with which we must deal: the demographic disaster, the moral disaster, and the media disaster. And of course, they are all tied together; they are all aspects of a single disaster. We wouldn't have a demographic disaster if we didn't have a moral disaster. We wouldn't permit our country to be invaded and taken over by non-Whites if we still were a manly people with a manly sense of responsibility. And what has subverted our morality, what has sapped our manliness and our sense of responsibility more than anything else, has been the Jewish control of our mass media of news and entertainment. More than soft living and luxury, more than the transition from a rural, agricultural life-style to an urban, industrial life-style, the Jewish domination of Hollywood and Madison Avenue during the past half-century has taken us to the brink of extinction.
If we want to pull ourselves back from the brink, if we want our people to have a future again, we must face these things and overcome them. We must halt the darkening and mongrelization of America; we must regain our morality and our manhood; and we must regain control over our media of mass communications and thence over the p
Free Speech Directory || National Alliance Main Page