American Dissident Voices Broadcast of June 9, 2001
Hello!
When anyone wants to eliminate a problem or overcome an obstacle, it's
usually a big help to him to understand the nature of the problem or the
obstacle. If he misunderstands the nature of the problem and bases his
attempt to eliminate it on that misunderstanding, he's far more likely
to fail than if he tackles the problem with a thorough understanding of
its nature. That's self-evident, and probably my worst enemies would
agree with me on that. And yet there are some very important problems
that are frustrating us in our efforts to solve them simply because most
of us have made no serious effort to understand their true nature. We
have just assumed that the nature of the problems is self-evident when
in fact it is not.
The most important example of this is the assumption that the reason our
civilization is self-destructing is so-called "liberal" social and
political policies. There is a general belief that we have a
preponderance of liberals in our government, in the media, among school
administrators, among Christian preachers, and so on, and that most of
the White public goes along with the destructive policies of these
leading liberals because most members of the public also are liberals.
And I'm using the word "liberal" to designate a person who has a
particular set of beliefs, much in the way a Christian has a particular
set of beliefs. That is, a Christian believes, among other things, that
a man named Jesus of Nazareth, born approximately 2,000 years ago in
Palestine, was the son of God; that he walked on water, resurrected the
dead, and performed other miracles; and that after he was crucified at
the demand of the Jews he rose from the dead and ascended into heaven.
And a liberal believes, among other things, that all featherless bipeds
are "equal" -- that is, that they all are born with the same potential
and would be equal in their accomplishments if they all had the same
advantages and opportunities.
And as I said, there is a very common assumption made that the ongoing
destruction of our society and our civilization is the consequence of
applying the fallacious belief system of the liberals to the formulation
of public policy. But this very common assumption is incorrect -- or
perhaps it would be better to say that it misses the point. Liberal
policies certainly are destructive, but they aren't the ultimate driving
force behind the assault on Western civilization and our race. And so
any attempt to restore our society to health and save our civilization
from ruin based on an effort to change the beliefs of liberals -- to
convince liberals of the incorrectness of their ideas -- is likely to
fail. It is likely to fail because the problem is only superficially,
but not fundamentally, the consequence of a group of people -- namely,
liberals -- basing their policies on a particular set of incorrect ideas,
such as the innate equality of all featherless bipeds. The problem is
not one of belief, but one of psychology, of human nature, and of the
skillful psychological manipulation of that nature by hidden agents.
I am sure that there are real liberals: that is, people who have thought
about the world around them and then consciously adopted the liberal
ideology. They constitute a fraction of a per cent of the people who
adhere to liberal policies and pay lip service to liberal ideas. The
rest -- that is, nearly all so-called "liberals" -- are liberals for the
same reason that Catholics are Catholics and Lutherans are Lutherans and
Buddhists are Buddhists. It has nothing to do with the ideologies of the
various religions and everything to do with psychology. With a few rare
exceptions, a Catholic is not a Catholic because he has thought about
the world around him and decided that Catholicism is what makes the most
sense. He is a Catholic because his parents and his neighbors are
Catholics. He is a Catholic -- or a Lutheran or a Buddhist -- because he
is a lemming, and lemmings don't make up their own minds about anything.
They believe -- really believe -- whatever they think the people around
them believe.
With liberals today it's not so much a matter of believing what one's
parents or neighbors believe as it is believing what one perceives to be
fashionable in one's peer group, and the perception most often comes
from one's television screen. It is possible to persuade an occasional
liberal that his view of the world is incorrect and his policies are
destructive and he should straighten out his thinking, just as it is
possible to persuade an occasional Lutheran that Martin Luther really
was the Antichrist and that Lutherans should beg the Pope for
forgiveness and return to Holy Mother Church. It's a hard sell in either
case. And as I said, it misses the point.
The point is this: Liberals are tools. Most of them are not inherently
evil or destructive, any more than a hammer used to smash a statue by
Phidias is evil or a match used to burn a great library is evil..
Liberals are morally neutral, like the hammer and the match. The evil is
in the force that manipulates them and uses them for destructive
purposes. The evil is in the mind that plans the destruction and then
uses the liberals to carry it out. And that force is the force that
controls our mass media of news and entertainment. That mind is the mind
that formulates the slant of the news and the content of the media
entertainment; the mind that determines which news will be reported and
how it will be reported, and which news will be suppressed; the mind
that determines which trends will be made fashionable and which ideas
will be deemed Politically Correct.
And it is that force, that mind, that malevolent spirit that we must
counter: that we must be aware of in making our plan to restore our
society to health and halt the ruin of our civilization. When I said a
moment ago that our problem is not one of belief but one of psychology,
of human nature, I meant that we should not focus our efforts on trying
to change the beliefs of the liberals but rather on exposing and then
destroying the malevolent entity that manipulates the liberals by
exploiting their psychological compulsion to conform to perceived norms.
That's a fact, but as I said at the beginning, most people who're
interested in eliminating the problem fail to see it that way. They
still want to fight the liberals rather than the hidden force behind the
liberals. What I'll do now is try to persuade you that my understanding
of the nature of the problem is correct by providing a few examples or
illustrations of the way in which the problem manifests itself.
We might note first the global nature of the problem, the global way in
which it is being orchestrated. Almost everywhere one looks in the White
world, one sees the same destructive forces at work, the same
governmental policies, the same wrongheaded attitudes and fashions being
promoted by the media. There are, of course, local differences of
detail. The United States had a large population of Black slaves until
136 years ago, and no country in Europe has that sort of history. One
would expect this difference to have a strong effect on racial attitudes
and policies, but in fact the policies of governments throughout Europe
and the party line promoted by the mass media of news and entertainment
throughout Europe are in broad outline the same as those in the United
States.
The denial of racial differences and the doctrinaire promotion of
egalitarianism are as much policies of the mass media and the government
in Germany, in France, and in the United Kingdom, for example, as in the
United States. Most European countries have no common border with a
non-White country, as the United States does, and yet one sees the same
insanely destructive policy regarding non-White immigration nearly
everywhere in Europe that one sees in the United States. Nowhere is
non-White immigration popular, and yet every government pursues a policy
of bringing non-White immigrants into the country and then favoring and
protecting them after they are in. One sees the same sort of corruption
of the society by Turks, by Arabs, by Blacks, by Pakistanis, by
Vietnamese, by Chinese, or by other non-Whites in the big cities of
Sweden or Denmark or England as in the United States. The majority of
the Whites everywhere are against it, while their supposedly democratic
governments and the media are for it.
A good example of this is what's been happening in northern England
recently, where Asian gangs have been attacking and terrorizing Whites,
and the government and the media have been trying to blame it on "White
racists," such as members of the British National Party, the BNP. In
fact the dynamics of the current racial rioting in the Manchester,
England, area and in nearby Leeds is remarkably similar to the racial
conflicts we've seen in places like Seattle and Cincinnati recently in
this country. In Seattle and Cincinnati, Blacks were attacking Whites --
specifically targeting Whites, especially young, White women, for
vicious beatings fueled by racial hatred -- while the media tried hard to
persuade the public that race had nothing to do with the attacks, and
the politicians were making promises of more handouts to the Blacks and
looking for Whites to arrest in connection with the rioting so that they
could not be accused of "racial profiling" because they arrested more
Blacks than Whites. In the Manchester suburb of Oldham, with a
population of nearly a quarter of a million -- 15 per cent of which
consists of Asian immigrants brought in by the British government
against the will of the British people since the Second World War -- gangs
of Pakistanis, Bangladeshis, and Indians have been attacking Whites,
while the media and the politicians have been trying to blame it on
Whites, who supposedly provoked the Asians. Change the names of the
cities, and the news stories in England about the Oldham race war or the
race riot just three days ago in Leeds could have been written in this
country about the riots in Seattle and Cincinnati.
I'll read to you excerpts from a couple of news reports which came from
Oldham during the last two weeks. An Associated Press International
story from Sunday, May 27, reported, and I quote:
"At the height of the clashes -- which continued off and on for seven
hours, into the early hours of Sunday -- up to 500 youths fought pitched
battles with police in full riot gear. The fighting left the main
thoroughfare in the town's Glodwick district littered with broken
bricks, shards of glass, and the hulks of several burned-out cars.
"Paul Barrow, proprietor of a pub that was trashed in the fighting, said
rioters burst in and began beating his patrons. 'The first of them got
through the door and attacked the customers with whatever they could get
their hands on -- bottles, stools, and glasses,' he said." -- end of
quote--
Did you hear anything about that? I'm sure that you would have heard
plenty and would still be hearing about it if 500 Whites had been the
ones rioting and beating up Asians. And do you know how the rioting
started? The same Associated Press International story says, and again I
quote:
"The riot apparently was sparked when a gang of white youths attacked a
home in a neighborhood where most residents are of Pakistani,
Bangladeshi, or Indian origin, police said. Soon after, a group of about
100 youths from the neighborhood attacked a pub mainly patronized by
whites." -- end of quote--
Actually, gangs of Asians have been attacking Whites in Oldham for
months. Most of these attacks have been ignored by the media, although
an especially vicious incident earlier this year did make national
headlines. In that incident Asians nearly killed a 76-year-old White
man, Walter Chamberlain, when they smashed his face with bricks while
screaming anti-White insults at him.
I'll read you another news report, this one from the May 30 issue of
London's The Times. I quote:
"White families barricaded the windows of their homes with planks of
wood last night as residents in the Oldham riot zone retreated behind
ethnic lines. . . .
"Earlier Jack Straw, the home secretary, tried to blame racial conflict
in the town on intervention by the British National Party, but angry
local white people told a different story. After Chief Superintendent
Eric Hewitt said on television that all but a few of the 20 people
arrested overnight were white, The Times sought the views of the town's
shrinking white community.
"People described themselves as being under siege. Neighbors told of
sending children to stay with families in Manchester and
Ashton-under-Lyne so that they were not injured by bricks flying through
windows or kept awake at night by police helicopters. . . .
"Mr. Straw told the Oldham Evening Chronicle yesterday: 'It is plain
beyond doubt that relations between different sections of the community
can only be poisoned by the intervention of extremists like the BNP. I
utterly deplore their attempts to exploit the situation in the town.'"
-- end of quote --
Straw's comments about the BNP are nearly identical to those of the
local media and government people in York, Pennsylvania , about me and
the National Alliance when some of our material was distributed in York
recently. I told you about that in my broadcast two weeks ago. If one
isn't aware of the underlying forces involved, that sort of global
unanimity might be surprising.
By the way, Jack Straw, the United Kingdom's minister of home affairs,
who among other things is in charge of the country's police agencies, is
a Jew. So was his predecessor as home secretary, Michael Howard. I have
no idea how he managed to appropriate a good English name like "Howard,"
but while he was in office Howard banned me from the United Kingdom. He
told me that if I ever attempted to enter that country again I would be
arrested. The reason for my banning, he said, is that I might cause a
breach of the public order. I told him that I had never in my life
caused a breach of the public order anywhere. But the banning still
stands. A Jew is able to tell me that I cannot visit the land of my
ancestors, and his order is enforced by English policemen!
What do you think is the likelihood that the present Jewish home
secretary, Jack Straw, will ban any of the Pakistanis or other Asians
who smashed in Walter Chamberlain's head with bricks? Well of course,
you know that there's no chance at all of that because the same
unwritten rules apply in Britain that apply here. An attack on a White
by a non-White is not regarded as a breach of the public order. It's
only when a White defends himself against non-Whites that the media
begin yapping about "hate crimes," and the government politicians spring
into action.
And it's not just Britain and the United States. The same controlling
force is at work in Germany, in Scandinavia, in France, in Canada, in
Australia, and everywhere else in the White world. From Switzerland to
Sweden it is against the law to question the Jews' claims about how many
of them died during the Second World War in the so-called "Holocaust" or
how they died. In Switzerland people are in prison now for saying, "I'm
not convinced that six million Jews were killed in gas chambers by the
Germans. I think that fewer than six million Jews died during the war,
and most of them died from disease in the concentration camps, rather
than from poison gas." Say that over here, and the media will denounce
you hysterically as a "Holocaust denier." Say it in Canada or Australia
or Switzerland or almost any other country in Europe, and the government
will lock you up.
It is not just an amazing coincidence that we have this global
similarity in conditions at this instant in time. What we can see is the
same organized campaigns, the same well oiled legislative and social
programs, the same hidden forces behind these campaigns in every
country. As I said, there are differences in detail, but the same evil
minds, the same schemers are at work globally. Take any program, any
campaign -- the current campaign by Jewish groups to have more "speech
crime" legislation enacted in the United States, for example -- and if
you want to see where it is headed, look at any other White country
where the same program has met a little less resistance and been able to
gain more ground. Where the campaign has gone in one country is where it
is headed in every country, because the same malevolent force is behind
it.
I'll give you another indication that it's not soft, weepy liberal
sentiment that's wrecking our society today, but rather a cold, hard,
cunning, evil force behind the liberalism, using the liberalism to push
a hidden agenda. It's not some soggy, mushy idea that everything which
somehow qualifies as "human" is equal that is the driving force behind
the ruin of our civilization, but rather it is a strongly cohesive group
of people that consider themselves superior to everyone not in their
ethnic/racial/religious group and only use egalitarianism as a wrecking
tool against our society. My organization, the National Alliance, has
for several years been publishing information on the racial differences
in the incidence of HIV infection in the United States. One of our
leaflets, which we have distributed widely on university campuses,
points out that heterosexual Black males are 14 times as likely as
heterosexual White males to be carriers of the AIDS-causing virus. We've
also pointed out that while AIDS among Whites is largely a disease of
homosexuals, among Blacks it's largely a heterosexual disease. Well,
when we point out this startling difference between Black and White HIV
infection rates for heterosexual males, with Blacks 14 times as likely
to be infected, liberals don't want to believe it. They don't want to
believe it because it is contrary to their primary belief in equality,
in the essential sameness of Blacks and Whites.
But of course, the people behind the scenes -- the schemers -- are
concerned with facts, with reality, not with nutty notions of equality.
The sophomore college girls can squeal in disbelief when we present our
information about racial disparities in the spread of AIDS and can
denounce us as "haters," but the AIDS professionals, the experts,
understand the truth of the matter. I have in front of me, on my desk at
this moment, a poster -- a large, colorful poster -- published by the
Florida Department of Health, intended for distribution in Black
neighborhoods. It says, in large black and red letters, and I quote: "1
in 50 Blacks in Florida has HIV." -- end of quote-- And it gives an 800
number for blacks to call for free HIV testing.
So why aren't the White college girls in Florida told that two per cent
of Blacks are HIV infected? The government is telling the Blacks this
but hoping that Whites won't find out. Why is that? Could it be that the
people behind the scenes don't want White college girls to be wary of
having sex with Blacks? Could it be that they want White college girls
to become infected with HIV?
I believe that's exactly what they want. I believe that the people
behind the scenes want the destruction of our people by any means,
including racial mixing with Blacks. That's why the experts, the people
who know the facts about AIDS, are afraid to speak up and tell the
college girls that the National Alliance is correct. They are afraid of
bucking the Jews behind the scenes. I have seen this fear manifested
over and over again, and it is one more evidence of the powerful forces
which simply use liberalism as a destructive tool against our people.
Thanks for being with me again today.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
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 ADVlist.
To subscribe to ADVlist send an e-mail message to:
ADVlist-on@NatVan.com (The subject and body of the message don't
matter.)
For more information about National Vanguard Books or the
National Alliance see our web site at http://www.natvan.com or
http://www.natall.com.
==> The National Alliance has a strict anti-spamming policy. This
information is intended for interested parties only and is not to be
indiscriminately distributed via mass e-mailing or newsgroup posting.
To contact us, write to:
National Vanguard Books
Attention: ADVlist
P.O. Box 330
Hillsboro, WV 24946
or e-mail: national@NatVan.com please tell us if we can post your
comments and if so whether you want your name or e-mail address
given.
--> TO BE REMOVED from ADVlist, send an e-mail message to:
ADVlist-off@NatVan.com (The subject and body of the message don't
matter.)
(c) 2001 National Vanguard Books
.
Back to Martin Lindstedt's Christian Israelite Church&State WWW Page.
Back to Patrick Henry On-Line
Back to The Thought 4 The Day
Back to Stuff I Wish I Wrote -- But Didn't
.