Free Speech Directory || National Alliance Main Page
Actually, I'm not interested in having Blacks and Whites get along better together. I want Blacks and Whites separated. In the long run, that's the only way to eliminate racial animosity, racial resentment, racial friction. And it's the only way that either race can survive in the long run. But the people who're behind all of these programs for making Blacks and Whites live with each other and like it aren't really concerned about our survival. They themselves are neither Black nor White, and their only concern is to keep both races under control.
Race relations really arenít the main thing I want to discuss. I want to talk about government programs for solving problems generally. I wonder if you have become as cynical about such programs as I have. Many people are concerned about the declining educational standards in America, and so the government has had one program after another to improve education. And of course, educational standards have continued to fall.
Look at the programs. Look at the details. Typically they're a hodgepodge of half-hearted, lukewarm semi-measures. One gets the impression that their real purpose is to fool people into thinking that the government is doing something about the problem.
Why is that? Why do things in this country continue to get worse and worse while the government spends more and more of our money on programs which are supposed to make things better
The basic reason is that as the population of the United States has become more and more diverse, the country has become more and more difficult to govern. It has become more and more difficult to devise programs that will make most people happy or that will serve most peopleís needs.
Consider, for example, the schools. Fifty years ago, before the schools were racially integrated by government decree, schools were either Black or they were White, for all practical purposes. In the White schools there was a reasonable degree of homogeneity, and the government could make a program for White schools based on reasonable assumptions about the students to which it was to be applied. The same was true for Black schools -- but the assumptions about the needs of Black students were, of course, different from the assumptions about White students, and so the programs for Black schools would be different from those for White schools. Which is to say, the programs were tailored much more closely to the people they were intended to serve and therefore were much more likely to be successful.
Of course, even in schools where the students and teachers all were of the same race, there was a range of abilities, of interests, and of behavioral characteristics. But this range was small enough so that one program still could work reasonably well for everyone in a school system. If the programs could be tailored more closely to individual abilities, interests, or behavior, they generally worked even better. For example, there might be one program for students of high ability and one for students of average ability.
To people with a democratic turn of mind, the very idea that some students might have more ability than others is abhorrent, so even before the racial integration of the schools there was resistance to programs which were tailored to these differences. The Politically Correct idea was that everyone should fit the same mold, and one program should work for all.
After the schools were racially integrated and Political Correctness became the law of the land, we had an impossible situation. The temperaments and behavioral norms for Black students are quite different from those for White students, and the scholastic abilities of Black students are substantially lower than the average for Whites, and so programs intended to apply to integrated schools were almost guaranteed to be ineffective.
That hasn't stopped the government's program-makers from continuing to come out with one new program after another for improving America's schools, but all of real significance that has been done in the schools is a lowering of both the standard of conduct and the academic standard in order to accommodate the much greater diversity in the students.
And what has been true of the schools has been true of just about every other facet of our society. As our society has become less homogeneous and more diverse, it has been harder and harder to devise programs which work well. Programs have necessarily had to become less specific and more general in order to accommodate a more diverse population, and to the extent that programs are less specific they are less effective, as a rule.
It's not just that greater diversity makes it harder to solve problems: the greater diversity is itself the cause of many of the problems. The problem of racial hatred which Mr. Clinton has been pretending to address recently is an excellent example of this. Why do we have so much racial conflict and racial antagonism in our society today? It is because the government has insisted on increasing the racial diversity in every sector of our society, has insisted on bringing more and more non-Whites into the country and then forcing us all together, whether we want to be together or not. It is diversity and forced mixing which cause race hatred, nothing else.
There are a number of organizations in the hate industry in this country: organizations such as the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith and Morris Dees's Southern Poverty Law Center. These organizations make money from hate. They keep track of what they call "hate crimes," and they tell their supporters that hate in America is increasing, so please send money so they can fight it. The more hate they have to report, the more money they make. It comes as no surprise, therefore, that all of these hate-industry organizations are strongly in favor of more "diversity" in America and more forced mixing. They know what it takes to bring in contributions from their supporters.
Mr. Clinton, who is in the pocket of these organizations, is working on a new program to combat hate, he says, while at the same time he is promoting more "diversity" and more mixing.
Why do we have so many of these phony programs, these unrealistic and unworkable programs, which seem to be designed more to fool the public into thinking that the government is doing something than actually to solve the problems they purport to address?
Is it not because the whole system of government in this country has become crooked? Isn't it because the politicians who dream up these programs and administer them are people accustomed to lying to us and pretending to believe what they don't believe and pretending to be what they aren't? Isn't it because the people who give us the programs that are supposed to improve our educational system understand that there's not really much that can be done to improve education without addressing the race issue, without addressing the fact that racial integration is at the root of the failure of our educational system, and as long as they are not allowed to address this issue all they can do is go through the motions and try to fool the public? Isn't it because Bill Clinton, crooked though he is, is smart enough to understand that the racial friction and hatred can only grow as he pushes for more racial "diversity" in American life, because that is what his handlers demand, and so all he can do is pretend to deal with the problem?
And why do we have a crooked and ineffective government, when we desperately need a government that is honest and competent? Why must we put our lives in the hands of crooked politicians, who only pretend to be concerned with solving the problems which beset us, when we desperately need real leadership? Why is the system corrupt?
Is it not because the system is manipulated by the people who control the news and entertainment media in this country? Is it not because the media have gained such a powerful grip on the whole political process in America that they can virtually dictate to the politicians? Every politician who offers himself as a candidate for public office knows that the number of votes he receives will depend on the way in which the media present him to the public. Whether he wins or not will depend almost entirely on the image of him which the media create.
Bill Clinton is a perfect example of this. He has palled around with drug dealers and gangsters throughout his political life. His own brother was convicted and sent to prison for selling cocaine right out of the governor's mansion in Little Rock while Bill Clinton was governor of Arkansas. His habit of sending Arkansas state troopers to scout up women and bring them to him was well known among his associates long before the Paula Jones case. The media people certainly knew about his drug connections and his use of Arkansas state employees to satisfy his sexual appetite. If they had revealed these things to the American people in 1992, if they really had made an issue of these things, Bill Clinton never would have been selected as the Democrat Party's candidate. If the media had made an issue of the fact that Bill Clinton was leading pro-Viet Cong demonstrations back in the 1960s when 58,000 young Americans were being killed by the Viet Cong, he never could have been elected.
But the media chose not to make an issue of these things, because Bill Clinton is exactly the sort of man they want in public office: a man without principles or morals, a man who will do whatever seems advantageous to him -- and in particular will do whatever the media bosses tell him to do in return for their support. Now some of Clinton's immoral and illegal activities are beginning to come out. The media are beginning to tell us about some of Bill Clinton's activities, although certainly not about all of them, because for one thing he cannot be President for a third term and for another thing it's their way of keeping him under control. By keeping the pressure on him, by keeping him worried about the Paula Jones case and the illegal campaign contributions and a few other things, they keep him constantly aware of his dependence on them. If the media began harping on all of the immoral and illegal activities in which Bill Clinton has been involved they could have him impeached. They could have him out of the White House and in prison. And he knows that. So he is not likely to try to do anything contrary to the wishes of the media bosses during the next two and a half years.
Bill Clinton is an example, but the process of media control is basically the same for all of the politicians. And so the real question for us is, why do the media bosses use their control over the political process in America to damage and weaken America? Why did they push for an immigration policy which is flooding America with non-Whites? Why do they push for more and more racial "diversity," when it is clear that these policies are destroying not only our schools but our whole society?
We know the answer, don't we? I've talked about it many times. The answer is that the people who control our mass media, our media of news and entertainment, are not our people. They are not people who share our interests, our concerns, our values. They are an alien people, with different interests, different concerns, different values. They are a people unto themselves. They are Jews.
Every time I'm on a radio or television interview program and I mention this fact, every time I begin talking about the Jewish control of the media, the host will try to deny it or make light of it or change the subject. They know who signs their paychecks, and they will lie to protect those people. But the facts really are undeniable.
Let's look at some of those facts. The two biggest media conglomerates in the country, the two biggest media empires, are Time-Warner-CNN and the Disney Company. Time-Warner-CNN is controlled by Gerald Levin. Through the Time-Warner-CNN media empire he controls a vast array of news and entertainment media: publishing, films, and television. And Mr. Levin is Jewish.
The Disney Company, which also owns the ABC television network and lots of other things, is controlled by Michael Eisner, who also is Jewish. The Disney Company was built by one of our people, by Walt Disney, and it used to produce healthy and wholesome entertainment. But then Mr. Eisner got control of it, and now it's just part of a Jewish media empire: debased films, television, and publishing.
Or consider newspapers. The big three, the three most politically influential newspapers in the United States, are the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and the Washington Post. All are owned by Jews. They were not created by Jews originally, but they were taken over by Jews and they are now owned by Jews. All three of them. Quite a coincidence, isn't it, when you consider that Jews make up just two and a half per cent of the U.S. population?
Or consider news magazines. There are really just three news magazines in this country of real significance: Time, Newsweek, and U.S. News and World Report. They're all under Jewish control. All three of them. Time is part of Mr. Levin's Time-Warner-CNN empire. Newsweek is owned by the Jewish Washington Post Company. And U.S. News and World Report is owned by Mortimer Zuckerman, who also just happens to be a Jew.
If you doubt any of this, if you're not absolutely certain about the Jewish control of the mass media -- and I can understand that some of you may be uncertain about this, because the media lie about it and try to mislead people -- if you have any doubt at all about what I've told you, check it out for yourself. If you think, for example, that maybe Mr. Levin is an Irishman instead of a Jew, or that Mr. Eisner may really be a German or a Scotsman instead of a Jew, check it out. The facts aren't really all that difficult to find. If you think I haven't told you the truth about who owns U.S. News and World Report, check it out for yourself. If you think that the films coming out of Hollywood that promote interracial sex and homosexuality, that tell us that we owe the Jews a living because of the "Holocaust" -- if you think these films are produced by anyone but Jews, check it out. The facts are available for anyone with eyes to see.
The Jews control the media. But why do they use their control of the media to corrupt our government and destroy our society? Why when a Jew like Eisner takes over a non-Jewish film company like Disney, does he immediately change the type of films the company produces? Why does he switch from wholesome films like Snow White and Fantasia to films like The Crying Game and Priest, films which promote homosexuality and racial mixing? Why do these powerful Jews promote things like gangsta' rap in a way deliberately intended to corrupt young White people? Why does MTV (which, incidentally, is owned by the Jew Sumner Redstone, through his media holding company, Viacom) specialize in such degenerate entertainment aimed at our young people?
They do it because that is their nature. They have always done that sort of thing. They always seek control, they always seek power, and then they use that power to corrupt and destroy. That's what they're doing to America now. And if you want to know what you can do about it, what we can do about it together, join the National Alliance.
Free Speech Directory || National Alliance Main Page