National Vanguard http://nationalvanguard.org News. For us. For a change. Sun, 26 Apr 2015 14:30:45 +0000 en-US hourly 1 On Motivation http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/on-motivation/ http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/on-motivation/#comments Sun, 26 Apr 2015 14:30:45 +0000 http://nationalvanguard.org/?p=3292 Dr-Pierce-portrait-by-SM-Casper_commissioned-by-Kevin-Alfred-Strom

by Dr. William Pierce (pictured, portrait by S.M. Casper)

WE RECEIVE a lot of advice from our friends from time to time, and some of it indicates a lack of understanding on the part of those friends as to the nature of the Alliance and the motivation of its members.

One type of advice comes from those friends who are itching to do something exciting: fight Blacks, demonstrate against Zionists, and raise hell about this or that. Not all are motorcycle types or misplaced Kluxers looking for a bombing or a shootout. Some are older, more refined folks who nevertheless seem to think that where there’s a lot of sound and fury, even if it’s only a school board election or a tax protest, there‘s bound to be some kind of progress.

The slow and . . . → Read More: On Motivation]]> Dr-Pierce-portrait-by-SM-Casper_commissioned-by-Kevin-Alfred-Strom

by Dr. William Pierce (pictured, portrait by S.M. Casper)

WE RECEIVE a lot of advice from our friends from time to time, and some of it indicates a lack of understanding on the part of those friends as to the nature of the Alliance and the motivation of its members.

One type of advice comes from those friends who are itching to do something exciting: fight Blacks, demonstrate against Zionists, and raise hell about this or that. Not all are motorcycle types or misplaced Kluxers looking for a bombing or a shootout. Some are older, more refined folks who nevertheless seem to think that where there’s a lot of sound and fury, even if it’s only a school board election or a tax protest, there‘s bound to be some kind of progress.

The slow and difficult details of organization building don’t hold much appeal for these folks. They don’t want to spend a lot of time developing a network of outlets across the country for the few books we have published and for the great many more books we’ll publish in the future. They have very little patience for unexciting things like raising capital to buy new National Office equipment or finding exactly the right person to fill key functional positions in the Alliance. They tend to doze off when we begin emphasizing the need to build strong organizational foundations, to develop new functional capabilities one by one, to choose our cadres with care and test them fully.

Another type of advice comes from people who are not action-minded at all. They are the people who want us to spend more time talking about what needs to be done, instead of actually doing it; rather, they want an opportunity to do more talking themselves about what needs to be done. They would like to see the Alliance become a forum or a debating society for batting around ideas on race, on the Jewish question, on the type of society we want to build in a post-revolutionary world, and so on. They think that the Alliance is far too intolerant, far too apodictic, far too intent upon proceeding along a course which has already been laid out instead of calling for a halt and holding an interminable debate about where we are going and why.

Now, it is often the case that both these types of advice stem from good motivations. The people who are itching for crowds and noise and excitement are often simply very gregarious. They relate more easily to other people than to ideas or to organizational concepts, and it is hard for them to keep their energies focused on our task during the present phase of our development. Later, when the Alliance has many more members and has moved much more into front activity, these people will feel much more at home and, whether they entirely understand the reason for everything we are doing or not, will work more enthusiastically.

Even the younger ones, whose healthy instincts lead them to yearn for a real fight with our enemies, will find more than enough fighting to keep them happy, because there are violent and bloody days ahead for America, and there is no way our people can see the dawn of a new age until they have fully experienced the darkness of this one.

As for those who would rather debate than organize or fight, many are merely new to the Alliance and still need a little time to get their own thoughts sorted out. They were not here during the years of groping and false starts and the slow growth of understanding. They will in time, see that our course is, indeed, the right one, and then they will work as hard as anyone in overcoming the obstacles on that course.

And, of course, the Alliance is by no means closed to new ideas. Quite to the contrary; tactical flexibility is one of the cornerstones of our program. We are always ready to listen to ideas for better ways of doing what we must do–and to implement such ideas, if that is feasible at the time.

Unfortunately, some of those who give us advice of the sort I have described do not have good motives. There are people who would have us take up some populism program or other solely for their own amusement and excitement. There are those who have no real sense of responsibility to the Alliance, no real concern about whether we succeed or fail, but who are concerned only about what the Alliance can do for them now in terms of providing interesting new things to get involved in. The same can also be said of some of those who consul fighting at a time when we are not really prepared to win a fight.

And the same can be said of some of those who prefer that we were a debating society. We had one member–an ex-member now–who used to argue regularly for abandoning what he considered as an overly particularist stance. He argued that NV (National Vanguard) is too partisan and the Alliance too narrow in insisting that all members should pull together instead of debating eternally about which way to go. He was a former communist, and one of his favorite argument for turning the Alliance into a debating society used an analogy with the early Bolsheviks. Lenin and Trotsky and Kamenev and Bukharin and Sverdlov and the rest used to argue with each other all the time, carrying on like a meeting of the Knesset, he said, and their revolution succeeded–implying, of course, that it succeeded because of the debating rather than in spite of it.

I had this fellow pegged as a clever chatterer, someone who liked nothing better than to stir up a good dispute, because he knew he had a facile tongue. Later I found that his motives were a bit darker: manipulation and disruption seemed to be his aim. He tried to turn members against one another by criticizing some of them viciously behind their backs and circulating gossip about them, while sending them flattering letters and being ingratiating to their faces.

The Alliance, as I have said many times in the past, must have places in its ranks for many different types of people: People from different professions, people with different incomes and different levels of schooling, people with different lifestyles–and also with different opinions about many things. But one thing in which they must all be the same is in their willingness to put the Alliance and its goals first in their lives. If they cannot do that–if they do not believe that our task is that important–if they are not convinced that we must all pull together and that the Alliance is pulling in at least generally the right direction, then they shouldn’t be in the Alliance. They should be either in a populist movement, if that is their bent, or in one of any number of debating societies. They can even organize a brand new debating society, if none of the present ones pleases them.

The Alliance, in other words, asks a person to give up something when he joins. It asks him to give up a certain part of his independence. It asks him to put the common interests of his fellow members and the interests of the Alliance as a whole ahead of his own interests. Some people are able to do that and some are not.

Jesus of Nazareth is alleged to have said something which strikes me as very profound, a universal truth which applies as much to our case as to his. He said, according to the editors of the King James Version of the New Testament, something like this: “It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven.”

Well, it is not as difficult to be a good member of the Alliance as it is for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, yet it is not easy. It is not easy for the average American to subordinate his own interests to a higher cause. Most people don’t do it. That’s why the Alliance is an elite organization. It is not an organization in tune with these thumb-sucking times. It is a band of brothers and sisters for whom rendering service to our race, to our cause, is the chosen way.

It is an organization of people who want to grow, to recruit, but who would rather find a few good people, people who, like them, are willing to give up something, than a whole crowd of people who want to know what the Alliance can do for them. It is an organization of intelligent people, people with ideas–but they are people who also understand that what is needed even more than new ideas is people willing to work for the ideas we already have.

And, as I said, some of the people who come to us with advice just cannot comprehend this. They are people who, in one way or another, are looking for a new way to stroke themselves, and they cannot conceive of anyone having a motivation other than that. They are people who are constitutionally incapable of entering our kingdom. They are Jesus’s rich men.

But, in one very important sense, we are far richer than they. For it is only those who can transcend this dying world around them, who can devote their lives to the new age which is coming–those people who work to give shape and substance to that new age, who do not just talk about it but who actually convert the substance of their lives into the substance of the new age through their daily work–only those people have lives which are of real value, of lasting value. Only those whose work builds the Alliance into a stronger and more viable organization, an organization embodying the spiritual values of the new age and strong enough to survive this age–only they can experience the deep, deep, satisfaction which comes from the knowledge that one’s life has a value that will last beyond one’s individual earthly existence.

* * *

Source: From National Alliance Bulletin March-April 1980.

Join the National Alliance

]]> http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/on-motivation/feed/ 1
Jewish Terror: The Story of Lord Northcliffe http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/jewish-terror-the-story-of-lord-northcliffe-2/ http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/jewish-terror-the-story-of-lord-northcliffe-2/#comments Sun, 26 Apr 2015 14:00:13 +0000 http://nationalvanguard.org/?p=3278 Lord-NorthcliffeLord Northcliffe (pictured) was a victim of the Zionist establishment whose story deserves to be told, though it was covered up for decades. The lessons for us in his story are deep and profound.

by Kevin Alfred Strom

THE PRESS MAGNATE Alfred Harmsworth, later Britain’s Lord Northcliffe, once said: “News is what someone, somewhere is trying to suppress; the rest is just advertising.” Despite the fact that he was one of the most powerful men in what was then the British Empire, Northcliffe would eventually pay for that attitude with his life.

Northcliffe’s fall — from being one of the most powerful men in the world to being imprisoned as insane after which he quickly died — took only a few days. The trigger was his challenge to the Jewish power structure.

Northcliffe, who lived from . . . → Read More: Jewish Terror: The Story of Lord Northcliffe]]> Lord-NorthcliffeLord Northcliffe (pictured) was a victim of the Zionist establishment whose story deserves to be told, though it was covered up for decades. The lessons for us in his story are deep and profound.

by Kevin Alfred Strom

THE PRESS MAGNATE Alfred Harmsworth, later Britain’s Lord Northcliffe, once said: “News is what someone, somewhere is trying to suppress; the rest is just advertising.” Despite the fact that he was one of the most powerful men in what was then the British Empire, Northcliffe would eventually pay for that attitude with his life.

Northcliffe’s fall — from being one of the most powerful men in the world to being imprisoned as insane after which he quickly died — took only a few days. The trigger was his challenge to the Jewish power structure.

Northcliffe, who lived from 1865 to 1922, stood up to the political establishment of his time, damning Lord Kitchener during World War I when he was considered a war hero — and thereby engendering the hatred of millions and driving the circulation of his flagship paper down by some 80 per cent. He emerged victorious, just as he had in earlier decades when his business acumen and editorial skill had made him the outright owner of the two of the most widely read newspapers in Britain (and many other periodicals) and the majority proprietor of the then-leading newspaper in the world, The Times of London. Lord Northcliffe was possibly the earliest example of the modern press baron.

Northcliffe was a man who was a bit of a jingoistic nationalist — he took regrettable anti-German and anti-Boer positions, for example — and it is said that he would do almost anything to increase the circulation of the newspapers that he owned. Douglas Reed, in his interesting book The Controversy of Zion, writes “He was sometimes right and sometimes wrong in the causes he launched or espoused, but he was independent and unpurchasable. He somewhat resembled Mr. Randolph Hearst and Colonel Robert McCormick in America, which is to say that he would do many things to increase the circulation of his newspapers, but only within the limits of national interest; he would not peddle blasphemy, obscenity, libel or sedition. He could not be cowed and was a force in the land.”

ComicCutsNorthcliffe, the son of an English barrister, was born Alfred Harmsworth near Dublin on the 15th of July 1865. With his brother Harold (later Lord Rothermere) he started the magazine Answers to Correspondents in 1888, which rapidly became a success with its question-and-answer format, selling over a million copies a week. He then founded a children’s newspaper, Comic Cuts, a woman’s magazine, Forget-Me-Nots, purchased the bankrupt Evening News and made it a success by modernizing it, and founded the revolutionary Daily Mail, which pioneered low-cost production, lavish use of illustrations, the smaller tabloid paper size, terse, fact-filled writing, sports and women’s sections, serial novels, and banner headlines. By the time of the Boer war, the paper sold a million copies a day. Harmsworth took what he considered a patriotic position, stating that the Mail stood for “the power, the supremacy and the greatness of the British Empire.”

The part-Jewish publisher Joseph Pulitzer was so impressed with Harmsworth’s talents that he hired him to edit the first edition of his brand new New York World on the first day of the twentieth century, which he did — using the tabloid (meaning compressed) size which he had pioneered and named, and which later become the dominant format for British newspapers.

Daily MailOne failure of Northcliffe was his launching of the first daily newspaper for women, the Daily Mirror, which did eventually become a success when he made it into a picture newspaper for both sexes. He took his losses and accepted his defeat with philosophy and humor, saying “Disaster may often be changed to triumph by alteration in tactics. The faculty of knowing when you are beaten is much more valuable than the faculty of thinking you are not beaten when you are. I had for many years a theory that a daily newspaper for women was in urgent request, and I started one. The belief cost me £100,000. I found out that I was beaten. Women don’t want a daily paper of their own. It was another instance of the failures made by a mere man in diagnosing women’s needs. Some people say that a woman never really knows what she wants. It is certain she knew what she didn’t want. She didn’t want the Daily Mirror.”

It was in 1905, the same year that he purchased The Times and the Sunday Observer, that his achievements were recognized by his being made Lord Northcliffe — at 40 the youngest-ever peer of the realm. [ http://tinyurl.com/2wfla ]

The First World War was a tragedy of bloodletting, destruction, and death for millions of the best young men of our European race on every side of the conflict — a tragedy from which we have still not yet recovered. Its origins are lost in obscure and shifting alliances, commercial jealousy, and the cynical ‘balance of power’ policy favored by the British Empire at the expense of pan-European interests. Its end was a farrago of madness in which avarice, revenge, crackpot ‘liberal’ nuttiness, and Zionism dominated. It is this last item — Zionism — with which we are — and Lord Northcliffe was — concerned.

According to a defector from the Jewish power structure of the time, Benjamin Freedman, Britain was on the verge of losing that war in 1917, when the Zionist Jews made a proposal to the British government. Britain could yet win this war, the Zionists argued, if America could be brought into the conflict on Britain’s side. With their already-substantial control of the American press, and with their tight circle of ‘advisors’ around President Wilson (who was beholden to them because of indiscreet letters in their possession which he had written to a woman not his wife), the Zionists made a good case that they could deliver what they promised. But there was a price to be paid. The British Empire was at that time administering the small Middle Eastern territory of Palestine, populated mainly by Palestinian Arabs and Christians and with only a small minority of Jews. The Zionist Jews coveted that territory — which later became Israel when their land-grab came to fruition — and their price for bringing American soldiers to die in Flanders fields was a declaration from Britain that the Empire favored the establishment of a Jewish state there. The price was paid. Lord Milner and Foreign Minister Balfour drafted the Balfour Declaration — and the puppeteers pulled the strings on crackpot Wilson and America went to war to “make the world safe for democracy’ and to “end war,” proving that many Americans had had their brains turned to mush long before the advent of television.

The scholar Revilo Oliver has stated that Milner’s interest in supporting the Zionists, apart from the immediate objective of winning the war, was in removing as many Jews as possible from Britain, and giving them their own country thousands of miles away seemed as good a way of doing that as any. Similar motives animated Balfour, as I stated on this program last year:

“…Balfour’s naiveté [is] in this case, a stand-in and symbol of White naiveté in general. The Jews wanted a policy statement from the then-dominant world power, the British Empire, and they got it and used it to the hilt, not hesitating to kill Britons when it suited them, as in the Zionist bombing of the King David Hotel, and while other Jews were, especially after World War II, doing everything in their power to undermine the status of the White nations including Britain. The Zionist entity has outlasted the British Empire which gave it birth, though Little Britain is still of some assistance in some projects, like the murder of Iraqis, currently being undertaken by the self-styled masters of the world. What’s really interesting about Balfour, who gave the Jews their foothold in Palestine, was that he didn’t particularly like Jews — and that he was a racialist. Like Adolf Hitler later, Balfour was enamoured of the idea of the Jews leaving Europe to found their own state elsewhere. Both men negotiated with Zionist Jews to effect that end. Hitler offered them Madagascar in 1938. In 1903, while he was Prime Minister, Balfour offered them Uganda. In debates on the Alien Act of 1905, Balfour sought to cut off Jewish immigration into Britain. Balfour openly admitted in 1914 (to leading Zionist Chaim Weizmann, no less) that he shared the extreme anti-Jewish sentiments of Cosima Wagner. Balfour [even] spoke against Jewish immigration in the House of Commons.”

After the war, Lord Northcliffe became alarmed by Zionist ambitions and Jewish power. In 1920, he publicized the book that has been banned and furiously denounced by the Jews perhaps more than any other, the famous Protocols of Zion, which purports to be notes taken at a meeting of Jews sometime during the nineteenth century, detailing a plan for world domination through intrigues, deception, and terror. I have already published my criticism of the Protocols elsewhere, but suffice it to say here that, although the book is unlikely to be what it claims to be — an actual record of an actual meeting — and though it clearly was created by a polemicist with a religious bias (witness its barbs directed at Darwin and Nietzsche, for example), its insights into the Jewish mentality and Jewish techniques are insightful and its tracing (before 1905!) of many of the paths that would be taken by the Jewish establishment in the last century are amazing.

Northcliffe probably saw the Protocols much as I see them, and decided they deserved to be seen and investigated by the British people. Accordingly he saw to it that significant parts of them were published in the most prestigious newspaper in the country, The Times, of which he was the principal owner, under the title ‘The Jewish Peril, a Disturbing Pamphlet, Call for Enquiry.’ He did not declare the Protocols to be true, but rather called for a full investigation to discover whether or not they were true. He stated that “an impartial investigation of these would-be documents and of their history is most desirable … are we to dismiss the whole matter without inquiry and to let the influence of such a book as this work unchecked?”

In 1922, Northcliffe asked the editor of The Times, Wickham Steed, to travel to Palestine to investigate the real nature of the Zionist project there, feeling sure that Steed, once he saw how a tiny and foreign Jewish minority was determined to use every foul means to dispossess the Palestinians, would make a 180 degree turn and stop supporting Chaim Weizmann and the other Zionists as he had theretofore. In this Northcliffe miscalculated badly, for the Zionist hold on Steed (the exact nature of which deserves further investigation) was so strong that Steed openly refused to act upon any of the requests of the man who was the majority owner of the paper and who was therefore his employer! Steed would not go to Palestine; Steed would not publish an article critical of Balfour’s attitude toward Zionism when asked to do so; and, when Northcliffe himself went to Palestine, Steed would not even publish Northcliffe’s own dispatches from that troubled land. Who was protecting Steed? Who and what was motivating Steed? These questions became even more important later that year. Douglas Reed wrote:

Then in 1922 Lord Northcliffe visited Palestine, accompanied by a journalist, Mr. J.M.N. Jeffries (whose subsequent book, Palestine: The Reality, remains the classic work of reference for that period). This was a combination of a different sort from that formed by the editors of The Times and Manchester Guardian, who wrote their leading articles about Palestine in England and in consultation with the Zionist chieftain, Dr. Weizmann. Lord Northcliffe, on the spot, reached the same conclusion as all other impartial investigators, and wrote, “In my opinion we, without sufficient thought, guaranteed Palestine as a home for the Jews despite the fact that 700,000 Arab Moslems live there and own it … The Jews seemed to be under the impression that all England was devoted to the one cause of Zionism, enthusiastic for it in fact; and I told them that this was not so and to be careful that they do not tire out our people by secret importation of arms to fight 700,000 Arabs … There will be trouble in Palestine . . . people dare not tell the Jews the truth here. They have had some from me.”

The articles by Jeffries and Northcliffe didn’t get published in The Times, but they did see the light of day in Northcliffe’s other papers, greatly alarming the Zionists, who needed the acquiescence of the British people for their land-grab to succeed.

Things started happening very fast for Lord Northcliffe soon thereafter. On February 26th, 1922, he returned from Palestine. On March 2nd, he strongly criticized Steed at an editorial conference, expecting to precipitate his resignation. To Northcliffe’s amazement, Steed did not resign but decided to consult an attorney “to secure a lawyer’s opinion on the degree of provocation necessary to constitute unlawful dismissal.” Then, Steed says, he consulted Northcliffe’s own legal advisor who supposedly stated that Lord Northcliffe was “abnormal”, “incapable of business” and, judging from his appearance, “unlikely to live long” and who therefore advised the editor “to continue in his post.” On March 31st, Steed went to see Northcliffe in France and upon returning started spreading the story — even telling a director of the paper — that Northcliffe was “going mad.”

Douglas Reed himself worked with Northcliffe a few weeks later and reports he saw nothing at all indicating illness, madness, or abnormality of any kind. Reed also states that a very sane and sober Northcliffe informed him that someone was trying to kill him. Reed tells us:

The suggestion of madness thus was put out by an editor whom Lord Northcliffe desired to remove and the impressions of others therefore are obviously relevant. On May 3, 1922 Lord Northcliffe attended a farewell luncheon in London for a retiring editor of one of his papers and “was in fine form.” On May 11, 1922 he made “an excellent and effective speech” to the Empire Press Union and “most people who had thought him ‘abnormal’ believed they were mistaken.” A few days later Lord Northcliffe telegraphed instructions to the Managing Director of The Times to arrange for the editor’s resignation. This Managing Director saw nothing “abnormal” in such an instruction and was not “in the least anxious about Northcliffe’s health.” Another director, who then saw him, “considered him to have quite as good a life risk as his own”: he “noticed nothing unusual in Northcliffe’s manner or appearance” (May 24, 1922).

On June 11th, Steed met Northcliffe again in France and Northcliffe bluntly told him that he, Northcliffe, would now assume editorship of The Times. The next day, Steed, Northcliffe, and the entire entourage were aboard a train bound for Evian-les-Bains. Unknown to Northcliffe, a doctor (whose name has not been revealed to this day) was secreted aboard the train by Steed, and somehow Northcliffe was manipulated into his custody. When the train arrived in Switzerland another unnamed physician (described years later only as “a brilliant French nerve specialist”) was summoned and declared Northcliffe “insane.” Immediately Steed telegraphed the ‘news’ to London and ordered The Times to disregard and not to publish any communications from its primary owner. On June 13th, Steed returned to London. On June 18th, Northcliffe was back in London, too, but in custody and totally removed from all control of or communication with his far-flung enterprises. Even his telephone lines were cut. Police were posted at the offices of The Times to prevent his entering should he reach them. He never did.

On that same day, with Northcliffe out of circulation and his powerful voice of protest silenced, the League of Nations voted to reconfirm the ‘British Mandate’ in Palestine, which had mutated into a ‘mandate’ to install the Zionists in power there by violence and fraud.

On August 14th, 1922 Lord Northcliffe died, supposedly the cause of death being “ulcerative endocarditis.” None of the story of his alleged insanity or confinement was known to the public at the time. It was concealed for thirty years, eventually coming out in the Official History of The Times and, in greater detail in Reed’s The Controversy of Zion.

When Northcliffe died, he left in his will three month’s salary to each of his 6,000 employees, a total of 533,000 pounds — a huge sum in today’s inflated currency. The story of Northcliffe’s challenge to the Zionists deserves more study, as does the continuation of that challenge by Northcliffe’s brother Harold, Lord Rothermere. Rothermere eventually came to the conclusion that Jewish power needed to be defeated for the good of Europe, and that Britain’s best interest lay in support of the other European nations which had begun the fight.

Lord Rothermere wrote in the Daily Mail for the 10th of July, 1933:

I urge all British young men and women to study closely the progress of the Nazi regime in Germany. They must not be misled by the misrepresentations of its opponents. The most spiteful detractors of the Nazis are to be found in precisely the same sections of the British public and press as are most vehement in their praises of the Soviet regime in Russia. They have started a clamorous campaign of denunciation against what they call “Nazi atrocities” which, as anyone who visits Germany quickly discovers for himself, consists merely of a few isolated acts of violence such as are inevitable among a nation half as big again as ours, but which have been generalized, multiplied and exaggerated to give the impression that Nazi rule is a bloodthirsty tyranny.

The German nation, moreover, was rapidly falling under the control of its alien elements. In the last days of the pre-Hitler regime there were twenty times as many Jewish Government officials in Germany as had existed before the war. Israelites of international attachments were insinuating themselves into key positions in the German administrative machine. Three German Ministers only had direct relations with the Press, but in each case the official responsible for conveying news and interpreting policy to the public was a Jew.

[ http://tinyurl.com/ypbsf ]

Rothermere died — some say of a broken heart — shortly after the second great Jew-instigated fratricidal European bloodbath began in 1939.

The life and death of Lord Northcliffe have left us many lessons. Chief among those lessons is this: The enemy with whom we deal has no honor and no concept whatsoever of a fair fight, whether in a shooting war or in the war of ideas. Dealing with them as we would deal with an opponent of our own race, observing the conventions of civility and fairness and an honorable contest — and expecting the same from them, will be fatal every time. What we can expect from them is a stab in the back; poisoning; paid betrayers; lies, lies, and more lies in every direction one turns, lies so thick that they multiply faster than one can respond to them; and destruction of a million innocent lives if it gets them one inch closer to their inhuman goals.

* * *

]]> http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/jewish-terror-the-story-of-lord-northcliffe-2/feed/ 0
Martin Heidegger (1889-1976) http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/martin-heidegger-1889-1976/ http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/martin-heidegger-1889-1976/#comments Sun, 26 Apr 2015 13:00:39 +0000 http://nationalvanguard.org/?p=3259 Martin Heidegger, circa 1920AS FAR AS WE know there is only one atheistic philosopher whose thought ever triggered religious resonances in the soul of his readers. That was Martin Heidegger (pictured). His greatest work Sein und Zeit is poetry, drama and philosophy all in one, or as the master might say, all in all.

Heidegger died in May, 1976. He may eventually be known as the greatest thinker of the twentieth century. His delayed recognition by an America whose own philosophers have become second-rate ideologues is an insult to one of the great stirrings of the human imagination.

This is no place to summarize the main points or even the essence of Heidegger’s thought. He was the founder of existentialism, but quickly disowned it when plagiaristic intellects like Sartre and Teilhard de Chardin . . . → Read More: Martin Heidegger (1889-1976)]]> Martin Heidegger, circa 1920AS FAR AS WE know there is only one atheistic philosopher whose thought ever triggered religious resonances in the soul of his readers. That was Martin Heidegger (pictured). His greatest work Sein und Zeit is poetry, drama and philosophy all in one, or as the master might say, all in all.

Heidegger died in May, 1976. He may eventually be known as the greatest thinker of the twentieth century. His delayed recognition by an America whose own philosophers have become second-rate ideologues is an insult to one of the great stirrings of the human imagination.

This is no place to summarize the main points or even the essence of Heidegger’s thought. He was the founder of existentialism, but quickly disowned it when plagiaristic intellects like Sartre and Teilhard de Chardin started usurping, perverting, or religifying his philosophy.

Among a thousand other things, Heidegger taught us that a belief in immortality robbed man of his manhood. The play that has no final act, the time that has no end, the life that doesn’t round off cripple the whole meaning of existence. We act, we strive, we do the impossible precisely because we have a limited time in which to act, strive and perform our wonders. If we had infinite time, we would not be pressed; we would not concentrate; we would simply float along the boring streams of endlessness.

Time was not relative to Heidegger. Time was absolute. Anxiety and dread were not evil. They were the catalysts of the human spirit. No one, including Spengler, has delineated the Promethean and Faustian spirit in such bold strokes.

You will shudder when you read Heidegger. He dotes on the awful mysteries that this sickening age has tried to suffocate.

Heidegger dove deeper into the depths of being than anyone before him. And he found symbols and meanings in these depths that had never been seen by any other eye or imagined by any other mind. It is sad that the man who knew most about existence no longer exists. It is ironic that the man who could not abide the idea of an afterlife will live immortally in the mind of the future.

* * *

Source: Instauration magazine, September, 1976

More about Heidegger

]]> http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/martin-heidegger-1889-1976/feed/ 0
Thoughts on Radicalism http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/thoughts-on-radicalism/ http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/thoughts-on-radicalism/#comments Sun, 26 Apr 2015 13:00:36 +0000 http://nationalvanguard.org/?p=3246 WLP_2002_01by Dr. William L. Pierce (pictured)

ABOUT A YEAR ago the Alliance had as a supporting member one of the wealthiest women in America. One day, however, the National Office received a letter from her which said, in effect, “I’m beginning to believe from some of the things in your paper that the National Alliance is not a patriotic organization at all, but is radical and wants to destroy America. Please cancel my membership immediately.”

The woman was probably a dyed-in-the-wool conservative and couldn’t have been salvaged in any event. In many cases, however, people who have been accustomed to thinking in conservative terms can be illuminated. This little essay is intended to throw some light on the difference between the conservative and radical outlooks and to make it clear why the Alliance is, indeed, . . . → Read More: Thoughts on Radicalism]]> WLP_2002_01by Dr. William L. Pierce (pictured)

ABOUT A YEAR ago the Alliance had as a supporting member one of the wealthiest women in America. One day, however, the National Office received a letter from her which said, in effect, “I’m beginning to believe from some of the things in your paper that the National Alliance is not a patriotic organization at all, but is radical and wants to destroy America. Please cancel my membership immediately.”

The woman was probably a dyed-in-the-wool conservative and couldn’t have been salvaged in any event. In many cases, however, people who have been accustomed to thinking in conservative terms can be illuminated. This little essay is intended to throw some light on the difference between the conservative and radical outlooks and to make it clear why the Alliance is, indeed, a radical organization. It is assumed from the beginning, of course, that every Alliance member understands that the word “radical” says nothing whatever about the “rightness” or “leftness” of a person’s views, but only about the degree to which those views are rooted in fundamental principles.

Consider first a few concrete illustrations: When the stock market takes a nosedive, most conservatives will groan, and most Alliance members will chortle. When food prices take an especially sharp jump, the same reactions occur — even though conservatives and Alliance members eat the same food, and both have to tighten their belts. And when a politician is caught taking bribes or cavorting with homosexuals or prostitutes, the conservative will grit his teeth and vow to vote against the rascal at the next election, while the true radical will smile and say, “Bless you, Senator.”

And if the conservative sees the radical’s reaction to these things, he will certainly not understand. He will say: “No patriot could be happy that we have a bad economy and a corrupt government. Therefore, radicals are not patriotic.”

The truth of the matter is that the Alliance radical no more wants an unstable economy and high prices than does the conservative, and the radical is actually far less tolerant of political corruption than is the conservative. But . . . the radical’s understanding is also far deeper than the conservative’s, and his values are probably different as well.

The reason why the two react differently to the sorts of things mentioned above is that the radical is distressed by the disease eating out the soul of Western civilization and is determined to effect a cure for the disease while the conservative is distressed only by the symptoms of the disease and will be happy if they can be suppressed, even though the disease itself remains. The radical knows that, as long as the cancer is in our guts, it is better that it hurt like hell than we feel no pain, because only in the former case will we actively seek a cure.

Consider some more concrete illustrations: Given a choice between Dwight Eisenhower and Lyndon Johnson as U.S. Presidential candidates, the conservative — even the intelligent conservative — will unhesitatingly choose the former, because Ike at least looked honest, while not even the most naïve rube would have bought a used car form LBJ.

And for exactly the same reasons the radical will choose LBJ. As long as the inner rottenness remains — as long as the same destructive forces are at work behind the scenes — then it is better that the perfumed bandages be ripped off America’s running sores, so that they can stink in the nostrils of those who would rather pretend that all is well. Better LBJ’s sly, oily, palm-rubbing, all-too-evident crookedness to remind the American cattle what their political system has degenerated to than Ike’s phony façade of propriety, which only encourages the cattle to continue munching contentedly.

And on the foreign scene, better a reptilian, hate-oozing, bloodstained, Old Testament, hook-nosed, Yiddish-accented Jew like Menachem Begin out front as leader of world Jewry, leaning hard and contemptuously on the U.S. government as he arrogantly demands more and more for his Chosen Race, than a blond, half-Europeanized, “reasonable” Jew like Yitzchak Rabin. World Jewry remains the same in either case, and Begin is like the rattlesnake’s rattle or the skull and crossbones on the bottle of cyanide.

So far, so good. Most Alliance members can probably accept, witout lengthy soul-searching, that it is better, for the time being, that we be governed by carelessly greedy corrupt politicians than by carefully greedy corrupt politicians; that we be confronted by fire-breathing Black militants than by “good niggers” who work hard and stay off the streets; that the media masters be Talmudic stereotypes than Aryanized, baptized Jews.

But there is more. We are living now under a system which is inherently racially destructive. Either we destroy it, or it will destroy our race. The Alliance is, therefore, in a state of total war with the System. Whatever aids a successful outcome of that war is good, and whatever hinders a successful outcome is bad.

If the shooting had already started, it would be easier for everyone to maintain a proper wartime outlook and to evaluate things accordingly. But the shooting has not yet started, and this fact tends to keep some people disoriented. They tend to think that we have some sort of temporary truce with the System — that hostilities are, at least, limited, if not altogether suspended.

That is not true. Hostilities are not limited; it is merely that both sides are restricted in their choice of weapons at the moment. Anything that we can do, with that one qualification, to help our eventual victory — anything — must be done whenever the opportunity arises.

This means that we approve of many things which a person who has not yet developed a wartime outlook finds quite shocking. Committed to total war, we think of the System only in terms of damaging it and eventually destroying it, whereas the conservative thinks in terms of reforming it. There are many people who share our racial views and who have advanced beyond conservatism, but who simply have not yet drawn the necessary conclusions from their views; they will, therefore, often find themselves on the opposite side of an issue from us, aligned with the conservative rather than with the radicals.

Destruction and waste appall most sane people, but these are unavoidable concomitants of war. We all have a stake in America’s resources, in her public buildings and facilities, in her industrial capability, even in her cities. And yet we must be willing to sacrifice as much of this as necessary in order to defeat the System, if the one thing which really counts is to be saved. The moral decision is not unlike that in the well-known motion picture, The Bridge Over the River Kwai. We must sever our emotional attachments to things which are of more benefit to the enemy than to us, until the war is won.

The transition to a truly radical outlook comes when the individual has severed these attachments and is no longer trying to save the bridge (to continue the analogy) into which he has put so much work, but accepts the fact that it must go. And has been stated before, The Turner Diaries is not a plan or blueprint, and it is highly unlikely that the events of the next few years will bear a detailed resemblance to those of the novel. But the book has more than entertainment value, because it helps the reader understand the aforementioned aspect of the radical outlook.

We must be radical, but we must also be careful. The dyed-in-the-wool conservative will always equate radicalism with nihilism, but we want to take pains to ensure that the people we’re trying to recruit don’t make that equation. We also want to be sure that we do not, by our attitudes or our actions, allow such an equation to become valid.

These dangers are very real. Every revolutionary movement will inevitably pick up adherents who are genuinely anti-social rather than merely anti-System. I have known people calling themselves revolutionaries who use that label as a justification for shoplifting and other petty criminal activities, the real motive for which was personal gain rather than advancing any revolutionary cause.

Indeed, one can argue that such activity strikes a blow against the Enemy — or, at least, that segment of the Enemy represented by Jewish department store owners. Vocal elements on the left make similar arguments in favor of petty criminal activity as means of “ripping off the ruling class,” and a couple of best-selling books with that theme have been published in the last decade.

One does not have to defend the property rights of Jewish merchants in order to refute such arguments, however. Pettiness is one stigma we do not need to inflict on ourselves. Self-indulgence is another. Irresponsibility is a third.

The radicals we want must have an outlook which prepares them to do what is necessary to win, without squeamishness or self-doubt. But whatever they do must be done with the highest sense of responsibility to the future and without motives of self-interest — rather than merely to prove that they have rid themselves of “bourgeois morality,” as seems to be primary incentive on the left.

We must be imbued with a higher morality, rather than with amorality. Our radicalism, in word and deed, must have about it an aura of nobility, rather than pettiness.

Even so, relatively few people from the general public — just like our wealthy ex-member — will understand or approve our radicalism. Most will not voluntarily accept the revolutionary remedies we propose.

The radical — as the Latin radix indicates — is concerned with the roots of things, which are often hidden from view, while the average person is concerned only with the obvious and the apparent. The radical is also concerned with the temporal extension of things — with what they have been in the past and what they will become in the future, while most people consider only the present or, at most the immediate future.

The radical extrapolates a social or racial process to its conclusion and justifies his remedy by this conclusion. If the conclusion is drastic, then the radical is willing to propose a drastic remedy.

The average person, however, does not see the conclusion; he sees only the present stage of the process, and he is unwilling to accept a remedy more drastic than warranted by the present stage. Thus the average person always reacts to something which has already happened; he never anticipates a development and takes preventive action.

The remedies for which we are calling now seem “extreme” (i.e., we are “extremists”) to the average citizen. Our proposed cures seem “worse than the illness.” To one who is capable only of seeing the present danger, the large-scale social economic disruptions concomitant to our program seem an unacceptably high price.

When the process for which we are now proposing, radical remedies, presently rejected by the public, reach their conclusion at some time in the future, then the public will feel the presently proposed remedies are appropriate. But then it will be too late.

There are just two ways around this problem. One is to ignore public opinion and do what must be done in spite of it. The other is to stimulate the public’s feeble imagination so that it can see, at least in part, what the radical sees. We are obliged to use both these ways, to a greater or lesser extent, and we shall consider which should be greater, and which lesser, at another time.

* * *

Source: National Alliance BULLETIN, November 1978

]]> http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/thoughts-on-radicalism/feed/ 0
The Sense and Nonsense of Jung http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/the-sense-and-nonsense-of-jung/ http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/the-sense-and-nonsense-of-jung/#comments Sun, 26 Apr 2015 12:30:40 +0000 http://nationalvanguard.org/?p=3228 Carl Gustav JungFrom racial consciousness to the “Indianization of the American psyche”

THE PRESENT-DAY disciples of the great Swiss psychologist Carl Gustav Jung (1875-1961) are understandably circumspect when it comes to the master’s hypothesis that each major race has its own collective unconscious. For as much as any factor, it appears to have been Jung’s belief in this hypothesis which caused him to regard elements of the Nazi movement as a beneficial emergence of racial élan from the Germanic unconscious and to view the early stages of Nazi Germany with something less than the de rigeur abhorrence demanded after the fact by the high courts of informed opinion. The issue of Jung’s attitudes toward the Third Reich is even today an unresolved one, and his words, deeds, and motives are still matters of contention. . . . → Read More: The Sense and Nonsense of Jung]]> Carl Gustav JungFrom racial consciousness to the “Indianization of the American psyche”

THE PRESENT-DAY disciples of the great Swiss psychologist Carl Gustav Jung (1875-1961) are understandably circumspect when it comes to the master’s hypothesis that each major race has its own collective unconscious. For as much as any factor, it appears to have been Jung’s belief in this hypothesis which caused him to regard elements of the Nazi movement as a beneficial emergence of racial élan from the Germanic unconscious and to view the early stages of Nazi Germany with something less than the de rigeur abhorrence demanded after the fact by the high courts of informed opinion. The issue of Jung’s attitudes toward the Third Reich is even today an unresolved one, and his words, deeds, and motives are still matters of contention. An advance reader of an as yet unavailable biography based on new research (C. G. Jung: The Haunted Prophet by Paul J. Stern) informs us that an entire “chapter is devoted to the flirtation with Nazism — neither, it seems, as innocent as Jung always insisted, or quite as bad as has been claimed” (Rosemary Dinnage, “Jung and God,” New York Review of Books, April 15, 1976). (ILLUSTRATION: Jung looking out over Lake Zurich)

The ongoing deliberation over Jung’s “guilt” makes a cautionary point which can hardly be lost on Jung’s professional disciples in America. They know their archetypal patterns. They can foresee all too clearly the penalties the liberal-minority mediacrats would mete out to any Jungian who dared to carry racial fire to the Majority. It is one thing to admire the mythic Prometheus, another to emulate him.

But it is not quite fair to impute intellectual cowardice to the Jungians. The master’s body of thought is a many-splendored grab bag offering a variety of plastic theories for every occasion, so it may be that a disciple is sincere when he shunts aside the hypothesis that got the master in trouble and embraces one that is more attuned to the spirit of the times. Whatever the motives of such a Jungian in this regard, his alternative formulations are extraordinary, as the following “case history” should demonstrate.

Racial Dialog

Not so long ago B, an Instauration booster, got in touch with C, an old acquaintance, a fellow Majority member, and a medically trained, highly qualified, and devout practitioner of Jungian analytical psychology. B has always had a weakness for Jung — ­not the reporter of prophetic dreams, the witness to poltergeists, or the explicator of mystic texts of East and West, but the Jung of the theories of the archetypes and collective unconscious, the Jung who could write in Psychological Reflections, p. 157:

It is true that an earlier and deeper level of psychic development can be tapped, where it is still impossible to distinguish between an Aryan, Semitic, Hamitic, or Mongolian mentality, since all human races have a common collective psyche. But with the beginning of racial differentiation, essential differences are developed in the collective psyche. For this reason, we cannot transplant the spirit of a foreign race in globo into our mentality without sensible injury.

B, naively perhaps, was halfway hopeful that a Majority disciple of Jung would have the mental set not only to recognize the racial sources of the current Majority malaise (the illness that dares not speak its name), but in addition be equipped to offer some therapeutically useful insights. So, feeling C out, B quoted the master on racial mentality, and presented in a neutral, I-have-a-friend-with-a-probelm fashion the proposition that the Majority is undergoing, to its detriment, a process analogous to the psychological transplantation of which Jung speaks.

B pointed out that as recently as two decades ago, Americans of Northern European descent like C and himself knew themselves to be, in their biological, political, and cultural heritage, and in their numerical and social dominance, the archetypal authentic and “real” Americans. Since then, the Balkanizing campaign applied to American life — with its elevation of minority psyches to the rank of representative, and often preeminent, “American” psyches ­has had the effect of reducing the Majority to a rabble of psychological orphans suffering deracination to an epidemic degree. Either we are no longer certain who we are, or worse, we have accepted in meek confusion such demeaning and inaccurate tags as WASP, Anglo or Goy. Having delivered this prolegomenon, B then asked C if he had encountered in his clinical work any forms of psychological dispossession that might come under the heading of Majority deracination.

C responded that he was not familiar with the concept of deracination. He found B’s ideas “very interesting,” but thought them focused on “too superficial a layer of the psyche to be as disturbing as you are postulating.” After B had conceded that his thesis was in some respects amateurish and superficial, C magnanimously observed that there is indeed value in searching out “our deeper cultural roots to get in touch with our own identity.” He then said that the identity problem for the American — as Jung had explained it to a leading American disciple — was that he “never really got very far until he touched that Indian aspect of his psyche….”

B said little else during the session, for he found a certain poetic justice at work. He had used scripture on C, who in turn had trumped him, as it were, with a different chapter and verse. Moreover, it was a scriptural theme B recognized all too well, and he felt a little dense for not having anticipated its employment. He had only recently read one of Jung’s wilder variations on this theme: “The secret of the earth is not a joke and not a paradox. We need only see how in America the skull and hip measurements of all European races become Indianized in the second generation. That is the secret of the American soil” (Psychological Reflections, p. 156 — the page, incidentally, facing the master’s hypothesis on psychic differentiation between races).

B decided to take a second look at the flaws in Jung’s mystical pseudo-anthropology. The most obvious is Jung’s use of the term Indianized, as if he visualized all North American Indians in the manner of James Fenimore Cooper, seeing only the stereotyped “Apollo in the young Mohawk;” and as if there were not just as much physical diversity among them as in most other races. Further, it follows that Jung assumes that the American soil had, at some earlier stage, transformed Mongolian immigrants into Indians, whereas the study of North American paleo-Indian skulls of 10 to 25 millennia ago indicates that the fairly homogeneous Indian population has undergone remarkable little change on this continent.

As for the Indianization of European skull and hip measurements, one need only use his own anthropological eye for an easy refutation. B took the first comparison at hand. The Indian living nearest to him is an almost full-blooded Cherokee who is a short, cephalic squat endomorphic type with a brachy-cephalic skull. B’s people have been in North America for many generations, all of them gorging on the produce of the soil, yet he has an ectomorphic physique and a dolichocephalic skull, both of which he judges to be unadulterated Northern European in design. The only Indianizing of which he is aware is that accomplished by genetic transmission — and this, of course, is a two-way street which has made for the “Europeanization” of some Indian bloodlines.

Noble Savages

Unfortunately, Jung, the Swiss bourgeois who could see his own Germanic peoples with a reasonably clear and discerning eye, turned into a Rousseau-ish worshipper of the Noble Savage whenever he looked beyond Europe. Of his handful of visits to America, his only extended stay was in 1924-25­ when he spent a considerable period with the Pueblo Indians of New Mexico and came under the spell of an anti-white Taos Red Man. (How Jung would have relished the “teachings” of Don Juan, the Yaqui Indian guru “sorcerer” who is the hero of Carlos Castaneda’s series of bestselling books.) From this atypical and subjective experience, and on the basis, evidently, of some questionable anthropological findings, Jung seems to have concluded that the Northern Europeans in America have undergone both a physical and psychic Indianization.

Another European mystic who was visiting New Mexico at about the same time as Jung seems more or less in accord with the latter on two points. D. H. Lawrence, in his Studies in Classic American Literature, writes of the mysterious properties of different soils and of the presence of “the unappeased ghosts of the dead Indians … within the unconscious or under-conscious of the white American….” Lawrence’s idea of psychic resolution for both races is a merging of red and white spirits in a “new great area of consciousness.” In the same book, however, Lawrence mounts prolonged and devastating assaults on the sentimental Noble Savage view of the Indian and the idea that whites are, or can become, in any profound psychological sense Indianized.

As Lawrence and many other critics have noted, the relation of white to nonwhite is a pervasive and often obsessive theme of our national literature, running from our earliest writers through Cooper, Melville, Twain and Faulkner down to the racial mea culpas of contemporary American literature. But this is a long way from proving the Indianization of the American body and soul. In fact, we find that the Indian has been, for over a century, an increasingly marginal figure in the national consciousness. This is particularly clear when we compare the Red Man’s literary importance to that of the Negro. In his numbers, his proximity to us, his cultural interchange with us and above all in his having been so often a source of internecine conflict between segments of the Majority, the Negro has proved to be the one substantial and lengthening shadow on our literary landscape.

The Shadow Knows

The shadow figure is used here purposely. Those familiar with Jung’s theories will recognize shadow as his term for a deeply internalized sexual archetype which represents man’s most basic animal and instinctual nature. Thus, a Jungian might say that the shadow of a nonwhite Noble Savage crouches deep within the psyche of each Majority member, a sort of hybrid of our experience on this continent and a submerged remnant of the collective psyche we shared with all humanity before the differentiation of racial mentality.

Little in our serious literature supports such a concept. Our most honest and uncompromising writers portray the nonwhite shadow as an external phenomenon and tell us that white and nonwhite face one another across a virtually unbridgeable psychic gulf. Note, for example, the essential psychological differences separating Huck Finn and Nigger Jim, Ishmael and Queequeg, whites and nonwhites in Hemingway’s stories. Eloquent testimony on these differences can also be found in the work of minority writers. Two of the best American Negro writers, James Baldwin and Ralph Ellison, provide in their work many graphic illustrations of the basic incompatibility of different racial mentalities, often when their ostensible subject is the need for ending “white racism” and achieving integration. Our individual and collective experience bears out their conclusion that American society consists, at the psychological level, of major racial enclaves which touch but never interpenetrate, despite the most strenuous efforts of minority members from their side and Majority members from ours. All the evidence says that one’s shadow bears a racial imprint.

Such appears to have been the case with Jung himself. According to one of his disciples and apologists, it was Jung’s shadow that caused him, during the rise of the Third Reich “at the very moment when the Jews’ existence was threatened,” to stress “the difference between Jewish and non-Jewish psychology …. In the words of Jungian psychology one could say that the shadow became manifest….” (Aniela Jaffe, quoted by Gerhard Wehr in Portrait of Jung, 1971, pp. 141-42. In this context, p. 141, Wehr repeats one characterization of Jung as a “psychoanalyst foaming with fascism.”)

Return Engagement

B is of two minds about having another session with C on the subject of racial psyches. On the one hand, he feels correct in his diagnosis that C has an immovable block against hypotheses that flirt in foaming fashion with verboten ideology. On the other hand, B loves theoretical Jungianism and he does feel obligated at least to try to put C in touch with that Majority aspect of his psyche. So he will talk with C again.

First, B will question the analogy, quoted by C, which Jung made for his disciple: it is necessary for an American to get in touch with “that Indian aspect of his ‘psyche” in the same way it is necessary for “the European to touch that Teutonic aspect.” B will note that the Teutonic connection has genetic roots stretching back a millennium or more while the Indian connection is neither a genetic one nor of any comparable antiquity.

B will also note that American minorities are in a frenzy of activity these days searching for, and attempting to preserve the roots of their racial psyches, so that we find Indians on the warpath in defense of their heritage; Armenians returning on pilgrimages to Soviet Armenia (Michael J. Arlen in his book, Passage to Ararat); multitudes of Jews going to Israel (for very brief visits in which they stare at the Sabras, ask “Where are all the Jews?”, see the memorials to victims of “the Holocaust,” and scurry back to the “safety” of New York City); and at least one Negro (Alex Haley in his forthcoming book Roots) laboriously tracing his unrecorded genealogy back some 200 years to the banks of the Gambia River from which his African ancestor was kidnapped into slavery. B will ask if C would advise a minority patient concerned with his identity to get in touch with the Majority aspect of his psyche.

B expects that C will have all kinds of ingenious responses to the effect that B has taken too literal, narrow, and superficial a view of Jung’s ideas. B will cheerfully admit that this may be true and thank C for the donation of his valuable expertise — no small thing since it is worth, at the going rate, upwards of $50 an hour.

* * *

Source: Instauration magazine, September 1976

]]> http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/the-sense-and-nonsense-of-jung/feed/ 0
One Man’s Striving: Part 2 http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/one-mans-striving-part-2/ http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/one-mans-striving-part-2/#comments Sun, 26 Apr 2015 12:00:26 +0000 http://nationalvanguard.org/?p=3255 Simpson198306-Part_2_William_Gayley_Simson_addressing_group

by William Gayley Simpson

Part 2 of 7

The author of Which Way Western Man? rejected Christian theology before the end of the First World War, but he retained a commitment to Christian ethics for several more years.

(ILLUSTRATION: SPEAKING to groups of young people was an activity to which William Simpson devoted much energy during the years after the First World War. Here he talks with students after addressing a Christian conference attended by 800 of them in Sliver Bay, New York, in June 1925.)

Editor’s Introduction: THE TRAUMA OF THE First World War and the era of rapid social change which followed led many Christians to re-examine their beliefs. What has come to be known as “the social Gospel” gained strength, and new links were forged between Christianity and the political Left.

Indeed, much of . . . → Read More: One Man’s Striving: Part 2]]> Simpson198306-Part_2_William_Gayley_Simson_addressing_group

by William Gayley Simpson

Part 2 of 7

The author of Which Way Western Man? rejected Christian theology before the end of the First World War, but he retained a commitment to Christian ethics for several more years.

(ILLUSTRATION: SPEAKING to groups of young people was an activity to which William Simpson devoted much energy during the years after the First World War. Here he talks with students after addressing a Christian conference attended by 800 of them in Sliver Bay, New York, in June 1925.)

Editor’s Introduction: THE TRAUMA OF THE First World War and the era of rapid social change which followed led many Christians to re-examine their beliefs. What has come to be known as “the social Gospel” gained strength, and new links were forged between Christianity and the political Left.

Indeed, much of the energy — and nearly all of the leaders who were not Jews — of America’s movement toward the Left since the First World War have come from the Christian churches. In the wake of the war churchmen saw a new opportunity and felt a new motivation to restructure society in accord with the ethic of the Sermon on the Mount.

William Simpson had already been feeling his way in this direction during the war, seeking a role for himself which would accord with what he then thought were his own spiritual inclinations. Actually, as he realized later, he was being driven by an impulse which divided his soul and led him down a false path, from which it would take him many years to find his proper way. He writes:

[This impulse] was absorbed with the lot of the unfortunate, the ill-constituted, the poorly endowed — that is, with the masses, with the fate of the inferior, rather than with the discovery of superior men, and the problems of giving such men the richest opportunities, the fullest nurture that they (and through them, society) could benefit by, and of causing the proportion of such men constantly to increase. In short, I was animated by my pity and driven and guided by my sympathy. And through it all I was perfectly certain I was “following Jesus.”

He left the ministry in September 1918, not only having found his own theology incompatible with that of his church, but also having become impatient with the church’s hypocrisy in refusing to practice the social doctrine which Jesus had preached.

He had taken a strong stand against America’s participation in the war (much to the distress of the elders of his church), and he had formed close friendships during the war with other leading pacifists, among them Roger Baldwin, founder of the American Civil Liberties Union. When Baldwin offered him a position in the fall of 1918 as associate director of that organization (then known as the National Civil Liberties Bureau), he accepted it.

While serving in this position he read a copy of Sabatier’s Life of St. Francis of Assissi, and he was greatly moved by it. He felt a strong urge to follow the footsteps of St. Francis and devote his life to serving the poor, but he needed more thought before making such a move.

Other Christians were also searching for a new path, and there were numerous discussion meetings and conferences among them. William Simpson helped organize one of these in Swarthmore, Pennsylvania, in December 1918, where he also was one of the principal speakers. But his questions about his own role remained unanswered. He tells of his effort to find his way in the months which followed:

Upon my return to New York [from Swarthmore] my thought began to work fast, and to a conclusion. That I was not yet ready to act upon either the challenge that had come to me from St. Francis or the one from Muste, [2] I was sure. But I was not running away from either. On the contrary, I found myself wanting to do something to obtain the experience I needed to make decisions wisely.

Note 2 – A.J. Muste (1885-1967) had been a fellow student of Simpson’s at Union Theological Seminary. He began as a minister of the Dutch Reformed Church in America but became a Quaker in 1918. He later turned to labor organizing and went on to become one of the leading spokesmen and activists for America’s radical Left. He was one of the speakers at the Swarthmore meeting, and his challenge had been to organize a lay Christian order whose task would be the reconstitution of society along Christian lines.

One thing I had to get cleared up was the part I should take in regard to the whole economic situation. I wanted to find out what people had to do in this country to make a living. I wanted to find out what kind of people they were, just ordinary working people, and how they lived. And I needed to know much more about the organized labor movement .

It had occurred to me sometimes that perhaps I might here find the field of action I was looking for, and become a labor organizer or propagandist. But I did not want to do any more reading about it, at least not just then; nor did I want to get my impressions as a mere visitor to industrial situations, looking on safely and comfortably from the outside. I decided to become a laborer myself, and to do my best to get a thorough taste of the typical experience of an ordinary American workingman.

Thereupon I handed in my resignation to the Civil Liberties Bureau ….

I decided to begin with coal mining. On the morning of March 9th, 1919, with five dollars in my pocket, I set out from my home in Elizabeth to hitchhike to Scranton, Pennsylvania ….

Immediately upon my arrival I began to hunt for work in some coal mine, arid for labor leaders with whom I could discuss the social situation in which the close of the war had plunged us. Unemployment and consequent suffering were acute. All the shouting about democracy during the world-convulsion had made many workers think that a little democracy in industry wouldn’t be a bad thing. Revolution was in the air.

A man as well-informed as Scott Nearing, [3] once a professor at the University of Pennsylvania, was declaring that we should have a revolution within six months. And all the way across the country I found labor leaders who would have agreed with Steve McDonald, the labor leader of Scranton, who told me, “Revolution is sure, and not far off.” It was in this atmosphere of bitter discontent and eager hope of some great change for the better that all my experiences of the next few months were cast.

Note 3 – Scott Nearing (1883- ) taught economics at the University of Pennsylvania from 1906 until 1915, when he was fired for injecting militant Marxism into his lectures at a time when it was not yet fashionable to do so. He became a propagandist and organizer for dozens of Communist organizations and contributed his writings to their publications. In 1928 he was the Communist Party’s candidate for governor of New York. Although he was later expelled from the Communist Party for his excessive individualism, he has remained active on behalf of the Marxist cause to the present. He is now in his 100th year.

Simpson came into contact with Nearing through Norman Thomas (1884-1968), the leader of the Socialist Party from 1926 until his death and the U.S. presidential candidate of that party six times. Thomas had graduated from Union Theological Seminary in 1911, the year before Simpson matriculated, and was ordained a Presbyterian minister. He was the minister of the East Harlem Presbyterian Church and the director of the Friendship Neighborhood House, in an Upper East Side slum, in the summer of 1915 when Simpson graduated from Union Theological Seminary.

Simpson worked for Thomas that summer and met many of the Christian activists who were to play a prominent role in the politics of the Left in coming years.

Interesting talks with labor leaders were far easier to find than jobs. Hunt as I would I found nothing. The mines were running only part time, some of them only one or two days in a fortnight, so that for every job there were many applicants, most of them men with long mining experience. I could have had a job as a carpenter, but the $35 initiation fee put that beyond my reach. I even applied for a job cleaning sewers, only to learn that that work was not to open till the following month.

He persevered in his effort to find employment in the mines, however, working for a few days at a construction project in the nearby mountains to replenish his meager funds, and eventually he was hired as a miner’s helper. His task was to break up the heavy pieces of coal blasted loose by the miner with whom he worked and then shovel the coal into cars:

I found the work grueling. After several hours the heavy lifting, the hard shoveling and pitching, taxed me severely, despite the fact that I was constitutionally strong and had hardened myself by two weeks with a man felling trees just before I set out for Scranton. I sweated as I had never sweated before in all my life. Every stitch on me was as wet as though I had been working in water.

In his first day in the mine he loaded three cars — between 12 and 15 tons of coal — for which he was paid 55 cents per car, so that his total earnings for the day were $1.65. On his best day he loaded five cars. The work was not only dirty and exhausting; it was also extremely dangerous. Before he moved on to Pittsburgh for a stint in a steel mill he had two close calls in the mine.

In Pittsburgh he worked seven days a week, 10 hours a day. The mill was much less strenuous than the mine, however, and the mill workers shirked at every opportunity. Nevertheless, he found that they had much the same attitude toward their work that the miners had — namely, that it was a necessary evil — and the mill owner had the same lack of regard for his employees as the mine owner. After two weeks it was time to move on:

My next objective was the tire factories in Akron, Ohio, the center of the world’s tire industry.

While I was still in Pittsburgh I had seen attractive advertisements claiming that there was plenty of work to be had making tires for Firestone, Goodrich, or Goodyear; and I soon learned that such advertisements were published as far away as Chicago, New York, and even Boston. The result was that the labor market in Akron was kept flooded: there were always more applicants than there were jobs. Thus the factories could always skim the cream and let the rest go. And when they wanted to cut wages they could hold over the heads of their employees, as a whip, the threat that if they did not accept the lower wage rates it would be easy to find men on the streets who would.

I had two jobs in Akron. The first was with Firestone as “stock tender,” on the night shift. Never before had I turned my sleeping hours into hours of toil. The first night was misery. By morning I almost fell asleep on my feet. I got used to it, of course, but from my experience here and at other places later, I became convinced that the practice of changing shifts every week is needlessly disturbing to all the rhythms of the workers’ lives, and therefore to their comfort, health, and peace of mind ….

This job I first found myself doing, keeping rolls of rubber sheeting unwound across a table so that the workers could take what they needed readily, was itself enough to put a man to sleep. I felt that a cow would have had brains enough to be trained to do it. Doubtless by now it has all been made automatic.

I tried to keep myself awake by watching the men around me. The thing that struck me was the monotony of it. Each man had some little operation to add to the construction of a tire. Over and over again, the same little operation for eight hours. One man with a pair of dividers went around the “tread room” marking a line parallel to the rim on each side of each of 400 rotating tires, and he did this four times in eight hours. For his whole working day he did nothing but hold a pair of dividers against first one side and then the other of 1,600 tires — one simple motion repeated 3,200 times a day: day after day, week after week, month after month, till he could endure it no longer, and quit.

Presently I noted what subsequent observation amply confirmed, that all the men on the floor were young. There was not one I should have guessed to be over 35, and most of them were between 20 and 30. And no wonder: older men could never have stood the pace. They soon would have been weeded out. Perhaps they were never even taken on. After all, there was no need to hire them. There were plenty of young ones to choose from.

This pace! I After all the loafing I had seen in the steel mill, I could hardly believe my eyes as I watched how the men all about me worked. The tempo over the entire floor was snap, jerk, jump. Never before had I seen men work under such nervous tension. It was uncanny. I could but wonder what made them do it. Presently I found out.

It was the “speed up” system. I was myself caught up in it for the first time when I got my job “finishing” tires in the Goodrich plant. The methods used varied to some extent from factory to factory, but everywhere it was a device for making the workers race with a machine, with one another, or with both. By a stop watch, measuring to the fraction of a second, the employers would take the time required by one of their fastest workers to go through a certain operation, or “piece.” That was made the standard for all the workers, and all the workers were pressed to come up to it.

Or they would increase the amount of work involved in the piece, without raising the piece wage rate. This made it necessary for the men to work with greater intensity in order to earn the same income. One man told me that whereas 32 cents had once been paid for “finishing” alone, 32 cents was then being paid for making the whole tire ….

I could hardly find a single man who liked his job. Almost invariably they spoke of its monotony. Occasionally a man would say, “Aah, I don’t mind so long as I’m kept busy,” though that was hardly the same as saying he liked it. And the men’s reactions were to more than the nervous tension and the inhuman tedium. There were also the fumes of the benzene and the rubber cement used in building up the tires. The air reeked with them. Nearly all the men, I discovered, had been there only two to six months and had not yet had time to feel the effects of these poisons. The one man I found who had been there five years was yellow (“almost looked like a tire,” as an I.W.W. [4] member put it) ….

Note 4 – Industrial Workers of the World (“Wobblies”): a radical, syndicalist labor union which flourished between 1905 and the early 1920’s and was noted for its extreme militance.

“Piece work kills!” That is what a little group of I.W.W.s said about it one night that I spent talking with them in a small tenement room far into the morning. The general belief seemed to be that three years in the rubber business finishes a man. The speed-up system was a diabolically ingenious device for turning the blood of the workers into gold.

The rubber companies picked the best men, sucked the life out of them, and then threw them onto the scrap pile. They did not need to worry about what happened to them after that. The men might starve, or their children might starve or grow up stunted and weakly from malnutrition. But that did not matter. The far-flung advertisement of “work in the tire factories” had not failed of its aim. The streets of Akron were full of young men. From these the companies could continue to pick what they wanted. Somebody else could worry about those whom they had wrecked.

Yes, the words of the young I.W.W.s were full of venom. They hated the tire factories and all their works. They hated the hours hunger compelled them to spend inside their walls, and they looked upon each shift as eight hours in which they were forced every day to relinquish their freedom and go into a penitentiary. They hated the system of spies by which the owners attempted to ferret out every labor organizer, that they might get rid of him — by which, in fact, they had sometimes wormed their way into the very head office of the local union. But, above all, they hated the speed-up system, which forced them, for the sake of a paltry subsistence, to race at an inhuman pace not only with the machine but against their fellow workers.

They saw things through inflamed eyes, I allow. I realized that before I had left Akron. Things were not so bad as they pictured them — not quite. But nearly. Their attitude, on the whole, represented only the natural and healthy reaction of any human being with intelligence and a sense of his worth against being used, treated as a commodity — against being harnessed to a machine in a way that violated every instinct in him. They hated, and they did well to hate, having their very life coined into another’s gold ….

In Cleveland I found 30,000 to 50,000 men out of work. As there seemed little chance of a job, I pressed on to Toledo.

But Toledo was even worse. In this smaller city 20,000 men and women were out on strike. To look for a job was declared futile. What depressed me more than this was the conversation I had with some Socialists at their Toledo headquarters. I.had been talking with labor leaders and going to labor meetings ever since I first reached Scranton, to see what they revealed as to the workers’ aims and methods, their view of the situation that confronted them, and of life in general, for I was wondering if I should cast in my lot with them.

One of the questions I unvaryingly asked was, ”What do you think of violence?” For upon their answer to this I believed my ability to work with them must largely depend. Almost without exception the reply had been, in effect, “We don’t like it. We’ll never be the ones to start it. But if it is used against us, we’ll use it in return.” There was little evidence of principle in the attitude; it was primarily a matter of expediency. But even the militant I.W.W.s in Akron, while they declared themselves ready to use violence, were only girding themselves for what they believed the capitalists’ inevitable use of it against them.

Those Socialists in Toledo, however, seemed positively gleeful over the prospect of violence. They had scores of 20 years’ standing to settle, and they looked forward eagerly for the chance to get the capitalists down and kick them in the face. My arguments. against violence and revenge they only thought “would spoil a good revolution.” They spoke disparagingly of Scott Nearing’s pamphlet, then just published, in opposition to violence on the part of labor, and they sneered at his “dear love of comrades.” They seemed lacking in any fine sense of anything.

I arrived in Detroit late the same day feeling depressed and desolate. My pocketbook was getting pretty flat, and I had hardly eaten since breakfast. To save money I even thought of sleeping somewhere on the ground. But I finally settled on a cot in the hallway of a cheap hotel, and I was comfortable enough. But with the words of those Toledo Socialists running through my head it was a long time before I got to sleep ….

My special interest in Detroit was in the Ford plant, and in a few days I was at work operating a six-point. multiple drill press, which bored holes into the edge of the yoke of the Ford generator. In 15 minutes I had learned how to do what was expected of me, and after an hour’s practice could work the press at least as fast as the old hand by my side. I had to drill perhaps 800 yokes a day. The work was not heavy, but the speed, if kept up for a long time, as it often was when the yokes came fast and steadily, was a bit tiring.

I soon learned that I was in one of the easier departments. In many of them the work was heavy, and the machines timed so exactly that a man had to work at full speed all day to keep up. Even in my own department there were jobs more objectionable than mine. The fellow next to me had to thread each of the holes I drilled, a total of several thousand a day ….

It was while working at my drill press that I came really to understand why the Akron I.W.W.s had referred to the hours they spent in the tire factories as so much penitentiary life. As soon as the novelty of the job wore off — and that did not take long — I found that each morning my heart sank as I went to work. My eight hours I drearily endured, until, when at last it was time to quit, my spirit leaped like a bird that suddenly finds the door of its cage thrown open. All day long I felt chained, walled in, dead, myself like a machine going through motions.

I could not get free from that machine. I might leave it for a minute, but I must be back at once. There was no opportunity for thought. The work itself required none, and yet it required just enough attention to prevent thought about anything else: if I let my mind wander to fields of interest, I broke my drills. Nor could I talk. The din of the machines was such that I could make myself heard by my nearest buddy only by leaning toward him as far as I could stretch and yelling to him at the top of my voice. For the most part a man’s eight hours a day were spent walled up inside himself, without any real self-expression, obeying not some impulse from within, as is natural to every living creature and the need for the unfolding of its life, but instead the prod and imperious command of an external and utterly alien taskmaster. For eight hours a day his natural human instincts were blocked, and living impulse compressed into the hard, rigid, mechanical effort to be part of a speeding machine.

Doubtless I suffered under this work more intensely than most of the men who have become numbed by it, but then my suffering was relieved by the prospect of becoming free in a few days, whereas they had to face that sort of thing without hope of an end. Then, too, I had a purpose in the work, whereas they were doing it merely to get a pay envelope. In any case, I doubt if there were more than a handful of men in the whole factory, with its huge army of employees, who did not resent every hour they spent in such subjection to a machine.

One day I asked the man beside me how he liked his job. “Oh,” he said, “when I was in the Army I thought I could never come back to it. But here I am.” “Well, how do you like it?” I persisted. “Oh, it’s not so bad — no worse than it used to be.” “But that isn’t what I asked you,” I still persisted, “how do you like it?” “Like it? Of course, nobody likes it, but … ,” with a shrug of the shoulders that said, “You’ve got to earn a living somehow, and there’s nothing for it but to take what you can get.”

Evenings that my shift did not require me to be at work I often spent with Chet Emerson [5] and his friends. Commonly we discussed my venture; and I made much the same criticism of the capitalist system and held up much the same kind of society to take its place as might have been expected from a Socialist or an I.W.W. My social philosophy at the time inclined to be strongly collectivist. Yet I had my doubts and questions. And some of these were strengthened by the answers of Chet’s friends ….

Note 5 – Chet Emerson was a friend of Simpson of several years’ standing, with whom he stayed during his time working for Ford. In 1919 Emerson was the minister of a large Congregational church in Detroit. Later he became dean of the cathedral in Cleveland.

One day Chet and I, and a couple he had taken out to dinner, had a violent argument about the new social order. And afterwards the wife, who at first had almost scoffed at my venture, said to me quietly, “I am beginning to get your point of view. I don’t agree entirely, but I am beginning to understand.” And another day I drove straight at Chet with the question, “How can you fairly condemn the violence of the working class in their efforts to attain their ideals and what they believe to be justice, when for ends certainly no more noble you have sanctioned the violence of war?” When I returned home a couple of hours later, he was still in a brown study over that question.

Nevertheless, my own answers to a great many of the problems were far from certain; and as I at last found myself rolling on toward Chicago, I too was lost in thought about where the truth and the right really lay. Not about the capitalist system. In my rejection of that, thus far, I never wavered. But how to get rid of it without violence? And how to get a really beautiful social order when the overwhelming mass of the people, at the bottom, at the top, and throughout, were so full of greed and fear and hate — in general, so self-centered? …

He remained in Chicago only until he had earned enough money — at three dollars a day in the stockroom of a department store — to be able to travel further. His next stop was the open-pit iron mines of the Mesabi Range. During his work at a mine in Eveleth, Minnesota, he came to know his fellow workers better than he had in his previous stops:

Here as everywhere, all the way across the country, I could not find a single man who liked his job. One day I asked a brakeman about it — and braking is one of the easiest jobs in the “open pit.” “Like my job? No! But yo’ gotta work anywhere you go. Hell! What’s the difference!” Another day I asked Aleck, who talking about quitting and how often he quit his jobs, “Why do you change jobs so often?”

His mind worked slowly, especially at finding reasons and making generalizations, but finally he blurted out, “Why do I quit? Well, I’ll tell you. I just get so gosh darned sick of my job that I can’t stand it another minute! That’s why I quit!”

Thus also Gus, another one of the men, who had just quit. So I felt. So did Tom, a Greek from Athens trying in vain to save enough money to bring his wife and child to America. He had just “blown” a whole year’s savings on “wine, women, and song” and was resigned to his fate as a perpetual victim.

To me it was appalling that so few men should have any joy in their work. My experience seemed to give evidence that for most of the working people of the country life had become one long endurance: work, eat, and sleep was almost all they had time for. Their work, on which they used up the best they had in them, they loathed. It was no wonder the older ones had become numb and leathery.

When I thought of Tom and the fate that seemed ahead of him, my heart ached. In a little while I should be getting out of it. But he would go on — had to go on — in utter hopelessness. “Tom,” I said to him once, in rather a weak move to give him some heart, “it may be only 20 years till we have a revolution.” “Jesus Christ,” he exclaimed, “20 years? Too long! I dead by that time!”

It was that “had to go on,” I discovered, that utter inability to get out of it, that constituted the essence of “wage slavery.” When I first set out on my venture, though I had used the phrase, I had not really known what it meant. The slavery was not in the fact that the work was hard: it was in the fact that in order to exist men like those about me had to sell themselves into the will and hand of another, for his profit.

The machine was fast destroying the last remnants of the old craftsmanship, which in an earlier period had meant not only livelihood, but dignity, responsibility, self-expression, a free space for the development of personality. But now all that was gone. The machines, generally too costly to be owned by individuals, were owned by corporations or by a few rich men. Most men had become mere “hands,” with nothing to sell but their labor, and no means of living without selling it.

Their “freedom” was no more than a freedom to choose which master they would slave for. They might work for A or they might work for Z, but they could work for neither A nor Z except on the condition that they let him exploit them. There was no way to escape. There was no way to exist without a job; and the jobs were in the hands of men who owned; and their ownership was maintained by all the organized violence of society: laws, courts, prisons, police, and if necessary even the militia, with its bayonets, poison gas, and bombing planes.

In one way this new slavery, wage slavery, was even worse than chattel slavery. When a man owned a slave outright, it paid him to take care of that slave, even as he took care of any other piece of property, even as he took care of his horse and cow. But the wage slave the modern employer could work under conditions that ruined him, and when there was no longer any more to be got out of him he could fire him and let him live or die on the labor scrap pile. It was easy to find another man to take his place, even though the newcomer knew that the same fate probably awaited him.

The employer did not need to have, and commonly did not have, any sense of responsibility for the men who worked for him, not the sense of responsibility he had for the mules on his property, or for his inanimate machines. To replace them cost money; but after you had wrecked a man you could get another one to wreck simply by putting up a sign, “Man Wanted.”

And yet, when it came to making any constructive effort to remedy matters, the men at Eveleth were a supine lot. Possibly this was because Eveleth, from the point of view of industrial despotism, was the worst on the Iron Range. The Oliver Iron Mining Company owned the whole town and kept an iron heel on its neck. Anybody who opposed it was run out. I was told that in 1916, when the men were pretty well organized, the strike they attempted was broken by the company’s importing scabs all the way from Chicago and by the deputy sheriffs’ picking off the leaders. At one time, when the movement threatened to get out of hand, the deputies raided the houses where the leaders lived, shot and killed two of them and wounded a third. And nothing was ever done about it.

There were I.W.W.s in town, but I had difficulty in finding them, and their position seemed to me completely futile. A strike they attempted to pull off on the Fourth of July proved a sheer fiasco. They had some automatics and ammunition and were ready to fight, but that sort of resistance at that stage in the game would have been suicide.

I never joined the Wobblies. Of all the labor organizations I came across I liked them best: they were the most intelligent, fearless, and dedicated. And yet I had to confess that I was not enthusiastic over the idea of a social order to be built by the rank and file of the I.W.W.s I had met.

Meanwhile, through all the weeks I was on the Iron Range I went on wrestling with my own problem of what was to be my part and my place in the unfolding drama of my age ….

Shortly after I arrived I was leaning against the steam shovel during one of our breathing spells, thinking. I felt very certain that an intensification of the class war was not the way to go after the new social order I wanted to see. It was one thing to accept the fact of the class war as an actual and inevitable result of our existing economic system. It was quite another thing to preach it as the means to accomplish our purpose.

A striking sentence or two in Bertrand Russell’s Proposed Roads to Freedom was running through my mind and had reinforced my determination not to join the I.W.W. He declared that the “habit of hatred” among the working class, engendered by the class war, would remain and would attach itself to something else, and so perhaps make impossible the very fraternity on which the full success of Labor’s cause depended. “There is no alchemy,” he said, “by which a universal harmony can be produced out of hatred. Those who have been inspired to action by the doctrine of the class war will have acquired the habit of hatred, and will instinctively seek new enemies when the old ones have been vanquished.”

In my eyes the whole struggle between Labor and Capital was full of evil: hate, vengeance, greed, a ruthless determination to have and to hold, to get and to keep. Sometimes I was impressed with the evil on one side, sometimes with the evil on the other. But on both sides it was largely a matter of Force organizing to impose its will on a broken antagonist. It seemed to me I did not belong on either side. I wondered whether my true place might not be between the lines. I wanted to do something that would make for increased understanding and sympathy on both sides ….

After he left the Iron Range he laid track for the Northern Pacific Railroad, worked in a copper mine in Montana, and cut trees in Washington. And as 1919 drew to a close he began drawing a few conclusions:

How far my thinking had taken me by this time is revealed in the letter which, following the practice I had begun at the time of my first serious departures from the beaten track, I sent out to friends and relatives under date of December 31st, 1919. [6] It was essentially an analysis of the industrial situation and an announcement of my earliest conclusions as to the part I should take in relation to it.

I reminded my friends that when I set out to work my way across the country I had thought I might find my place in the organized labor movement; and I declared that the I.W.W.s especially had called forth my admiration, not only for the economic soundness that lay behind their attempt, in an industrial society, to organize the workers by industries rather than by crafts, but also for their devotion to their cause; their openness to toilers of any class, color, or creed; and for the reliance they placed on education and organization rather than on naked violence.

Note 6 – A slightly revised version of the letter was published anonymously in the March 18, 1920, issue of the Quaker journal The Friend, under the title “View of the New World.”

But I could not close my eyes to the fact that, nevertheless, between workers and employers, it was an issue of power, in which each side was trying to impose its will on its foe by one or another kind of force. This was the very essence of the class war, and I believed it had arisen out of and was an inextricable part of the capitalist system. Unequivocally I declared “that the class war exists whether I like it or not, that class consciousness arises out of the motives and antagonism engendered by the capitalist system, and that there can be no brotherhood on this earth with any change that stops short of. a complete abolition of this soulless institution.”

But to recognize class war as a fact was one thing, to sanction it as a means was quite another. I could not accept the deliberate spread and intensification of class consciousness, by which a man’s human sympathies were calloused and his understanding narrowed into a hard, self-righteous set against all those, whether capitalist or fellow worker, who did not stand with him.

And I saw that the strike, and especially the general strike, for all it was obviously the revolutionary worker’s most effective weapon, was nevertheless a weapon, a means of coercion, a kind of holdup of all society, by which a determined and united minority could force its will upon the real majority. It wasn’t even democracy, let alone the teaching of Jesus. There was no effort toward reconciliation; and its brotherhood, for all it was more inclusive than that of the Church, still stopped short at the capitalist. Its spirit was one of judgment, reprisal, and autocratic self-will.

All this raised again the very same question I had had to face in relation to the war. Suddenly I saw that the capitalists were the German Junkers; and the labor movement was the Allies fighting (or claiming to fight) for democracy, the rights of small nations, and an end of the war. The form the issue took was new and different, but the issue itself was the same. It was the old question of means. Be the ends never so good, was it possible to attain such ends by means that were incompatible with them?

I could not believe it. I saw that the force a man released upon the world was not so much his ideal, the thing he aimed at, which remained hidden in his head, but the means he chose by which to move toward his ideal, the things he actually did in pursuit of his objective. I had been certain that when the “idealistic American soldier went “over the top” and tried to plunge his bayonet into the Kaiser-supporting German, what the German reacted to was not the ideal but the bayonet.

The forces let loose on the world by an immoral means hardened human hearts against the very ideals for which the immoral means was resorted to. As a result the world’s idealism had failed to get any real hearing at the Peace Conference. And similarly in the class war, I was convinced that out of all the coercion, the lust for material possessions, the fear and hate and disregard for others that such a struggle involves, there could come no good.

The danger was that the change of system, already upon us, would bring only a change of masters, that in some new form the old tyrannies and wrongs that distressed us then would last on to distress us in the future. In short, though I was tremendously concerned that the change should come, I was even more concerned as to how it came. Once more it was that terribly searching question of method, over which, from the beginning, the mounting life of man has fallen.

And then I exclaimed:

“Is it not plain to all who have been given the eyes of the spirit that another battle is joined: an overhead battle, which overshadows in its significance even the struggle of the classes — a battle between a Wrong and a Right that have their representatives in the ranks both of Labor and of Capital — another `death-grapple in the darkness between old systems and the Word': between the way of the world and the way of the Cross? And until this battle is won, until men learn to win their struggles and build their societies by those principles which are the principles of the Sermon on the Mount, the triumphs of the Allied armies, the victories of the working class, and the changes of system, are all futile. They are a mirage of delusion.

“In our burning eagerness to reach our goal we are always seeking a shortcut, even if it be by a temporary transgression of the moral order. We think it will pass unnoticed because it is brief, or that we can atone for it by a renewed devotion to the Right in more salubrious days. We would cut the Gordian Knot, and the sword we choose with which to hack it through is the sword of crushing Might. But it will not work. It never has worked. It never can work ….

“Nor can there be any exception for the social structure that Labor would build today. What cannot be accomplished now by Love cannot be accomplished now at all ….

“None of us can be reminded too often as we begin to line up on the momentous issues of our day that in all the universe no truth is more inexorable that this: that there is a moral order from the reach of which no phase of human life can escape, an eternal Right and Wrong of things which none can trifle with or defy without coming at last to disaster. Good intentions will not get us by. Ignorance will not excuse us. It applies as relentlessly to a social order or a nation as to an individual. The judgment may be a long time coming, but it always comes.”

Today I could not talk thus about the “moral order of the universe” or “an eternal Right and Wrong”; nor, I am afraid, could I so sweepingly reject all use of force. But that was my position then, and of course it put me outside the labor movement. I saw that for me the labor movement was another blind alley, like the Church, a way closed to me, a way that could not take me anywhere. But I must be certain that this disability did not become an excuse for evading the issue. If that way was closed to me, I must strive to find some other way that would really cut into life and be an adequate channel for my thought and aspiration and devotion.

If I could not take sides in the war between the classes or find my place in one of the regular and established movements for social endeavor, it but pressed upon me the harder to find some way in which I could throw myself into that “other battle” where the sides were drawn on other than class lines. And for nearly a year this remained my primary problem. What could I do? What could I throw myself into?

Now, one of the conclusions to which my analysis of our economic situation had forced me was this: that even more than we needed any external change, any change in our economic and political arrangements, we needed a new kind of man on the earth. I felt that our institutions were only a reflection of the character and intelligence of the people who composed them. As water would not rise higher than its source, so one could not expect any society to prove more ideal than the human element from which it sprang. Start it as ideal as one might, in the long run the people would drag it down to their own level.

And so I felt that Tolstoy was dead right when, in his “Appeal to Social Reformers:’ he said that most of the world-improvers were like a man trying to make a fire with wet sticks. The man seemed to believe that if only he could find the right arrangement of the sticks, they would burn. The truth was that no matter how he arranged them he would never get a fire, until first he got the sticks dry.

And so with the problem of a better social order: until somehow we had more intelligence, higher character, but above all more true love for one another, all the alterations of external arrangement would prove futile. The new forms would but hide the old evils, which in time would surely crop out to plague us as before, and would continue to plague us till we became different men, a different kind of men.

There is perhaps some risk of misunderstanding in cutting off this selection at a point where the author is still describing his sympathies as they were more than 60 years ago. The reader who needs reassurance that William Simpson’s thinking developed beyond that of some of his illustrious fellow graduates of Union Theological Seminary, such as Norman Thomas and A. J. Muste, should read Which Way Western Man?, in which he brilliantly sets forth the conclusions of a lifetime of observation, analysis, and reflection. Those conclusions are markedly different from many of the ideas which he held as a young man in 1919.

The great value in these autobiographical selections is that they allow one to follow in detail the spiritual and ideological evolution of an extraordinarily sensitive and thoughtful man as he strives toward the light. Then, when he finally reaches the light, it is all the more illuminating for one who was able to climb with him from the darkness.

* * *

Source: National Vanguard, June 1983, pages 13-20

]]> http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/one-mans-striving-part-2/feed/ 0
Initial Successes and Recruiting Cadres http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/initial-successes-and-recruiting-cadres/ http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/initial-successes-and-recruiting-cadres/#comments Sat, 25 Apr 2015 21:30:07 +0000 http://nationalvanguard.org/?p=3204 WLP_1991_01by Dr. William L. Pierce (pictured)

THINGS ARE beginning to move faster now, as our larger National Office staff gears up for several new projects. The importance of this increased pace lies not just in the new projects themselves, but in its portents for the future growth of the Alliance.

In years past we often had to run as fast as we could just to stay in the same place. That was because people joined expecting dramatic results immediately, quickly became impatient with the slow pace of progress, and quit. We were lucky if we recruited enough new members each month to replace the ones who dropped out.

Then we changed our strategy. We stopped trying to maintain the interest of a relatively large number of lukewarm members and subscribers and concentrated instead on reaching a . . . → Read More: Initial Successes and Recruiting Cadres]]> WLP_1991_01by Dr. William L. Pierce (pictured)

THINGS ARE beginning to move faster now, as our larger National Office staff gears up for several new projects. The importance of this increased pace lies not just in the new projects themselves, but in its portents for the future growth of the Alliance.

In years past we often had to run as fast as we could just to stay in the same place. That was because people joined expecting dramatic results immediately, quickly became impatient with the slow pace of progress, and quit. We were lucky if we recruited enough new members each month to replace the ones who dropped out.

Then we changed our strategy. We stopped trying to maintain the interest of a relatively large number of lukewarm members and subscribers and concentrated instead on reaching a smaller number of persons with more character and winning a strong commitment form them. As these new cadres joined us, one by one, our capabilities began to grow. So far those capabilities have continued to be used to increase the quality of our printed propaganda, in order to reach more of the exceptional few.

And, although NV is far superior to any other racially oriented, radical periodical now being published, we still have a way to go. We must continue developing our capability for producing articles dealing with history, politics, race science, philosophy, and other topics, which are substantive, original, and innovative — the results of careful research, intelligent planning, and skillful writing.

We have already proved that this is essential for winning the top-quality cadres we urgently need. The arm-waving and shouting which the lukewarm like to see and hear just don’t convince the men and women of character and intelligence we want. Only quality attracts quality. And only the very highest quality attainable will tempt the people who have what it takes to win the struggle for the future of our race in which we are engaged.

So we will continue our emphasis on quality. But we are now approaching what might be thought of as a critical mass — a level of development at which the Alliance no longer has to exert all its efforts to keep form sliding backward, but instead begins to move forward with increasing momentum. The chain reaction for which we have worked so long is starting.

This is the consequence of having built our National Office staff to the point at which we can not only continue on our present course with NV but can also begin doing the things required to maintain the interest of persons with shorter attention spans — the thing required to hold the lukewarm, who in their greater numbers, will always be an essential complement to the cadres and the general membership.

That is, our National Office staff will soon begin producing, in addition to NV, printed material designed for readers with more limited understanding and less character that our present NV readers have: material for conservatives, for disgruntled taxpayers, for people who are looking for immediate relief form “the niggers” and aren’t really interested in a revolution or in long-range programs — in other words, material for “the masses.” People from whom we won’t be expecting to recruit cadres, but whose support we need as subscribers and contributors even at this stage, if the organizational structure is to have the means to continue to grow.

We do not intend to hold out to these people the false, “quickie” solutions for which they are looking, like the right-wing organizations and the conservative con-men are doing, but we can begin to offer them some auxiliary materials, more suited to their limited attention-span that NV. For example, as a fist step in this direction, NV’s book and film editor is preparing the first issue of a humor publication which, instead of giving the reader the serious analysis and revolutionary solutions of NV, will lampoon the government, the Blacks, the Jews, and the liberals, making the reader laugh rather than demanding that he think. But it should also provide an opening for NV in some circles where none existed before, and it will give every Alliance member a broader arsenal of material to choose from in attempting to reach new people and establish the sympathetic rapport we must have if the NV circulation and the Alliance are to continue to grow.

As a second step in that direction, we will prepare, early next year, a special introductory issue of NV, which will be designed especially for making initial contact with new people who may have difficulty in understanding the regular issue of NV. The articles will be simpler, shorter and more graphics than those normally in NV, and they will be tied to concrete problems which are of immediate and urgent concern to millions of non-radical Americans. At the same time, the introductory issue will avoid dealing with transitory news that will quickly become “dated,” so that we can print large numbers of the issue and offer them to members at low prices over a period of several months.

As with the humor publication, the ultimate aim of the introductory issue of NV will be to increase the number of subscribers to the regular issues of NV and to thereby increase the resources available to the Alliance, because we do not have the means yet to undertake successful mass organizing. Our top-priority task remains the recruiting of cadres and the building of our organizational capability.

Our larger staff of cadres also allows us to work more closely with the general membership of the Alliance than has been true in the past, when members have been left largely to their own devices. We still need at least one more cadre here in Washington whose specialty is internal organization rather than propaganda before we can do everything we should in maximizing the recruiting effectiveness of our members in the field, but we are already able to take a few steps in that direction: for example, we can now answer much more correspondence form individual members than in the past, when the shortage of office cadres forced us to leave a majority of our correspondence unanswered.

Early next year a Member’s Handbook will be printed and mailed to all members. It will tell them what is expected of them and will offer guidance and instructions for carrying out their membership responsibilities: suggested activities, do’s and don’ts, hints for more successful distributions of propaganda materials, guidelines for local recruiting and meetings, etc. Such a handbook has been needed for years, of course, but during the period when the National Office had its hands more than full just trying to publish a newspaper eight or nine times a year, it was a low-priority project.

As a first step toward an increased coordination of member activities, a new form has been prepared which should make it more convenient for members to give brief reports of their activities to the National Office each month. This will allow the National Office to be more closely aware of what is going on around the country and to report new or especially successful activities to other members in the BULLETIN. The Member’s Monthly Activity Report will be mailed with each issue of the BULLETIN.

Just so there can be no misunderstanding as to what the Alliance is doing at this time, here is a brief recapitulation of what has been said before in the BULLETIN — and which will be said again, at much greater length, in NV:

• We are not trying, at this time, to build a mass movement, to win elections, to “wake up America,” to educate the public, or to change its mind on any issue.

• We are doing just two things, and they are sowing seeds among the public and building a cadre-based organization.

• Sowing seeds is not quite the same thing as educating the public, because most of the seeds we sow now will not bear fruit until conditions in America have changed substantially; only a few of our seeds will yield immediate results. We cannot change public opinion now, because we cannot compete effectively with the schools, churches, government, and mass media. We can merely make people aware of certain facts and prepare them to change their opinions at a later time.

• By far the more important of our two tasks is organization-building. This involves more that merely singing up lots of members; it involves building a function-oriented organization structure with a planned and intergraded set of capabilities.

• Each member who is a part of this organizational structure has specific tasks to perform.

• The largest number of members merely work at their customary occupations and render as much financial support as thy can to the Alliance; they provide the absolutely essential financial basis for the rest of the structure. They also are Alliance partisans, of course, who take advantage of every opportunity to influence other persons favorably toward the Alliance.

• The Alliance’s active members have, in addition to the financial-support task of the supporting members, the task of actively and regularly dissemination the Alliance’s propaganda material and winning new members and subscribers for the Alliance.

• From the ranks of our active and supporting members come our cadres, who are charged with specific responsibilities in the organization. For our cadres these responsibilities are the central elements in their lives, everything else being subordinate to the Alliance’s work. Only the very best of our members may become cadres, and once they do, a total commitment is demanded form them.

So that is what we’re doing now, and it is what we’ll continue to do in the future. As we grow, gaining more of a supporting base, more members to disseminate our ideas, and more cadres to add to our functional capabilities, we’ll be engaging in more different kinds of activities and on a larger scale, but our two basic tasks — sowing seeds and building our organizational structure — will remain the same. The alert member will keep this essential fact in mind and will evaluate every activity in which he engages by asking himself: Will this activity effectively disseminate the Alliance message, and, more importantly, will it win us new members and subscribers?

When the day comes that our organization has the capability for doing something other than those two things, you’ll hear about it.

* * *

Source: National Alliance BULLETIN, October 1978

]]> http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/initial-successes-and-recruiting-cadres/feed/ 1
One Man’s Striving: Part 1 http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/one-mans-striving-part-1/ http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/one-mans-striving-part-1/#comments Sat, 25 Apr 2015 21:00:18 +0000 http://nationalvanguard.org/?p=3221

Simpson198303_young_minister-1

EDITOR’S NOTE: This seven-part series from the unpublished autobiography of William Simpson, was originally published in the March, June, and August 1983 and March, August, and December 1984 issues of National Vanguard magazine. This is a deeply moving, hard-hitting, no-holds-barred personal growth odyssey that makes Somerset Maugham’s “soul voyage” classics The Razor’s Edge and Of Human Bondage pale in comparison. William Simpson evolved from a liberal Christian minister and co-founder of the leftist ACLU to eventually find enlightenment in a much more realistic and scientific world view. — William Fox

* * *

(ILLUSTRATION: WILLIAM SIMPSON in 1913: He has just arrived in Wild Rose, North Dakota, to spend the summer as a student preacher after his first year at Union Theological Seminary.)

One Man’s Striving

by William . . . → Read More: One Man’s Striving: Part 1]]>

Simpson198303_young_minister-1

EDITOR’S NOTE: This seven-part series from the unpublished autobiography of William Simpson, was originally published in the March, June, and August 1983 and March, August, and December 1984 issues of National Vanguard magazine. This is a deeply moving, hard-hitting, no-holds-barred personal growth odyssey that makes Somerset Maugham’s “soul voyage” classics The Razor’s Edge and Of Human Bondage pale in comparison. William Simpson evolved from a liberal Christian minister and co-founder of the leftist ACLU to eventually find enlightenment in a much more realistic and scientific world view. — William Fox

* * *

(ILLUSTRATION: WILLIAM SIMPSON in 1913: He has just arrived in Wild Rose, North Dakota, to spend the summer as a student preacher after his first year at Union Theological Seminary.)

One Man’s Striving

by William Gayley Simpson
(edited with the assistance of Dr. William L. Pierce)

Part 1 of 7

The author of Which Way Western Man? epitomizes his credo and recalls his feelings as a young Christian minister in these two brief excerpts from his unpublished autobiography.

THE DEEPEST DESIRE in everything that has breath is to live — to fulfill itself, to become what it was meant to become. Every man who, with sincerity and earnestness, begins to seek to know his destiny and the direction his next steps should take receives clear leadings, which become clearer the more he follows them. The needed intimations and intuitions are contained in his own deepest desire.

He may call this “the will of God” and believe it comes from outside and beyond him, as I did in the beginning; or he may remember hearing its voice within himself and give it the authority of the abysmal will of his own being, as I do now. But always, at bottom, it is what he himself wants most; that in him for which he is willing to let everything else in life go; that in him apart from whose satisfaction life holds no meaning.

What he wants, what he is able to want, will depend entirely on the stage he has reached in the development of his perception: how he sees, what he values. According to the meaning he finds, on the one hand, in physical pleasure, material possession, power over people; or, on the other hand, in the contemplation and creation of beauty, the discovery of truth, or the conquest of himself and the devotion of his powers to the realization of a nobler human life on this earth, so must he strive. His desire will be shaped, above all, by how he sees himself: as a separate entity, to be satisfied, therefore, apart from and even at the expense of other people; or, as one with other men, their deepest life so constituting an extension of his own that he may come to his supreme fulfillment in laying down his life for them.

Yet what he thinks he wants may be very different from what he really wants. At one time or another the former may even seem quite opposed to that wanting hid in the profoundest depths of his being, on the realization of which hangs the entire meaning of all his days on the earth. Finding out what one really wants is one of the most difficult, most costly, and, therefore, one of the last things most of us ever attain. Usually it takes long years, much suffering, and repeated experience of disillusionment.

Nevertheless, the desires born of the vision, the adoration, and the conviction of each dedicated moment as we come to it contain clues to our destiny, the intended meaning of our life both to ourselves and to society, and the next steps toward accomplishing it. Our whole hope of taking shape and becoming an ordered and organic whole depends upon our yielding ourselves to these intimations, while we strive to put off all concern for manifest results in the external world and all fear of consequences.

The alternative to a way of such inner honesty is a relapse into the confused, fluid, uncertain, and chaotic state in which we began, amounting to spiritual betrayal, paralysis, and disintegration. If we are to live we must take what we were born with, begin where we are, and struggle to follow the best light we have. Our heredity we cannot escape. Our environment we cannot greatly change. Either we shape it (or, at least, take a shape in the face of it), or it shapes us.

For well over 60 years I have believed that for a man to take his own shape and direction and to hold it even though it be in the face of a world that does not understand it –indeed, despises and hates it — is the greatest joy of which his life is capable; it is, at the same time, to meet in full his duty to society and to render to it his farthest-reaching contribution. Wittingly or unwittingly, in so many words or in other words, with one philosophy or another, for well over half a century I have said, “Be what you are. Make your outside match your inside. Be true to your deepest self.” I have believed it is right to do this even though it removes a man so far from the life and thought of his day that he seems doomed to die without having made any mark upon it, as long seemed true of Thoreau.

I have believed it right to do this even though, for all the love there is in him, he can find no way to go without bringing grief to those who love him. Not only have I believed such a course right, and justifiable at last by the obvious contribution such integrity has made to the unfolding life of men, but I have believed any other course to be wrong, a flight from life, a betrayal of the ultimate meaning of existence not only in oneself but in all other men.

This has been not only my philosophy and my religion: it has also been my practice. Probably even my severest critics would concede this. Before I had anything to say to other people, I struggled to put my deepest conviction and surest insight into my own life.

This has taken me ways I little expected to go when I first began to listen and to obey. I started very much like any ordinary young man: conventional of the conventional and orthodox of the orthodox. But more and more I found my face set in a direction counter to all my age believed in. While the scientist has seen life as struggle for existence, I have seen no meaning in existence unless it had elevation; and for the sake of elevation and quality of life I have striven to be ready even to sacrifice my existence.

While the psychologist has talked much of happiness and has seen life as a matter of “adjustment” to one’s environment, commonly meaning concession to it, I have thrown my “happiness” away again and again for the sake of an intangible I couldn’t see or lay my hands on or prove: I have preferred to exhaust myself or to be broken in an attempt to transcend my environment, rather than surrender to it.

Editor’s Note: As William Simpson states above, he did not begin his life with the full understanding of its meaning he now has. Instead he started in a very orthodox way, intending from the age of 20 to devote his life to the Christian ministry.

With that aim in mind he entered Union Theological Seminary, in New York City, as a scholarship student in the fall of 1912. After graduating magna cum laude three years later, he was offered a position as assistant minister at a prestigious church with a wealthy congregation in Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania. He chose instead to begin preaching at a very poor, run-down Presbyterian church in Carteret, New Jersey, a drab mill town.

Very early in his ministerial career he realized that there were important differences between his own faith and the official doctrine of his church. Nevertheless, he managed to make the necessary compromises, and on February 20, 1917, he was finally ordained a Presbyterian minister, although not without some stormy debates with his superiors. He then resumed his preaching at the church in Carteret.

The compromises he had made worried him more and more as time passed, however. He was beginning to make his way toward the light, but it was a journey which would occupy him for several more years yet. He tells of the ways in which he began to change, some 66 years ago:

I have often wished that I had not made quite the effort I did to get into the Church. After all, there are more people outside than in, and there are other lines of work into which a man can put at least as much dedication as into the ministry. I like the wry comment of Martin Luther: “Ich kann nicht so leise treten.” It was not in his nature to “pussy foot.”

And it is not in mine, really. While it is true that I had steadily refused to affirm my belief in Jesus’ ,virgin birth, and even more in his physical resurrection, I should now think of those days with less distaste if I had made no effort at all to put thoughts and convictions of mine, which I knew very well were contrary to what my examiners required of me, into terms and forms that would allay their suspicion.

However, I found myself a minister at last. And Dr. Henry Sloane Coffin, head of the Madison Avenue Presbyterian Church, one of the most important in New York, and soon to become president of Union Theological Seminary, began to exert himself to get me out of Carteret into some large church, more like the college church at Bryn Mawr which I had previously turned down. He even offered me a place on his own staff. At this time I had probably reached the high-water mark of my career in the Church.

Meanwhile the tide had begun to turn in another direction. Beneath the surface all was not well in my life as a minister. Two articles I read in the Atlantic Monthly about this time both expressed my unrest and added to it. They were by Edward Lewis, who had recently left the ministry of the Congregational Church in England to take to wayside preaching. [1] But it was chiefly my own experience in the ministry that had begun to turn me against it.

Note 1 – “The Failure of the Church,” Atlantic Monthly, December 1914; and “The Professional Ministry,”Atlantic Monthly, November 1915.

Many things I had to do went against my grain. I did not like being compelled to preach twice every Sunday. Even once every Sunday might have been too much. I resented having to subject my spirit to a clock and to hold forth just because it was a certain hour. I was not a spigot thus to be turned on and off in accord with some mechanical arrangement. I began to feel the “bondage of preaching”; and there were times when I returned home on Sunday evening with something akin to nausea, because I had forced myself and spoken with a show of feeling I did not really have; or perhaps because I had allowed myself to speak at all when in fact I had nothing to say, and my real need was rather to commune with my own soul.

There is nothing upon which a man’s spiritual growth and vitality depend more than upon the uttermost sincerity. For him to speak when he does not feel that his God has given him something to say, or to speak with a show of conviction greater than he actually feels, is to do violence to himself. In his soul he lies. The lie may be great or it may be small, but spiritual growth and vigor and significance do not develop in the man who lies in this way at all. For this is lying in relation to his God, in relation to his own innermost being. And that is “the sin against the Holy Ghost,” for which there is no forgiveness. The man who violates his own being begins to die. No man ever escapes it.

I am convinced that trifling at this point is the chief reason why ministers as a whole are so dead. I shall never forget the impression that stabbed into me one day, years later, when I walked onto the platform to address a meeting of all the Methodist ministers of Greater New York. As I turned and looked at my audience I seemed to see a crowd of men without faces, of faces covered with masks. Those masks were the outgrowth of their year-round habit of not saying what they really meant, of constantly allowing themselves to say what they did not mean.

Praying in public offended me in the same sort of way. There were times when I felt like praying, and there were times when I did not feel like praying. And to stand up and go through the motions of praying, just because that was the next thing on the program, seemed to me, if anything, even worse than forcing myself to speak in a way that did not come out of my heart. Moreover, in those days, at least, I yielded a supreme authority to Jesus’ mere word, and by all that I could make of what Jesus said about prayer in the Sermon on the Mount the kind of praying I was expected to do in my church services stood condemned.

He said, in effect, “Don’t be like the hypocrites, who love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street comers, that they may be seen of men; but when you pray, go into your own room, and having shut the door pray to your heavenly Father secretly. And your Father who seeth in secret shall recompense you.” We professed to believe that “your heavenly Father knoweth what things you have need of before you ask him.” But if we really believed that, I could not see why we said prayers in public except “to be heard of men.” At any rate, more than once I caught myself in the subtle insincerity of preaching at my congregation under the form of a prayer to God!

Also, I was beginning to feel strongly about the moral enormity, as it seemed to me, of our economic system. I saw that the Church in relation to this system was like a “kept woman.” In the world of time and space the Church was an institution, which, like any institution, had to pay bills. To get money it catered to those who had money, to those who were getting their money out of “things as they are” and who wanted to keep things that way.

To get money for new and larger buildings, for stained-glass windows, surplices, choirs, and larger salaries for ministers, the Church had sold its soul. It was emphasizing things Jesus never talked about. It was almost entirely silent about the things he lived and died for. The cash connection between the Church’s need of money and the kind of men she got her money from had helped to make her one of the worst enemies of the good of mankind. And the professional minister was its paid retainer. Increasingly I disliked getting my livelihood from an institution of this sort.

There were still other difficulties. But it will be enough to point out, finally, that I simply did not hold the orthodox theological convictions. It is hard to be strictly honest with yourself when you stand to lose by it so much as a minister usually does. Not till I was altogether out did I realize how much of a cast had been put in my eye by my half-subconscious realization that every unorthodox conclusion I reached would damage my prospects for advancement in my profession.

Nevertheless, I came to the place where I not only rejected the dogma of the virgin birth but was very skeptical about the so-called miracles, and I positively did not believe that the body of Jesus the Roman soldiers nailed to the cross ever walked the earth again. Above all, I did not believe that Jesus’ death made any difference whatever in the attitude of God toward man. To be sure, in seminary we had been given an interpretation of the significance of Jesus’ death that enabled us to go on talking about “the atonement.” But it was simply a bald fact that the doctrine thus revised and revamped bore no resemblance to, and had no connection with, the doctrine known down through the centuries as The Atonement.

According to the view of things I had reached, Jesus did not pay any price to God. No price was needed. My God was no Shylock. He did not demand the money on the counter before he delivered the goods of forgiveness. My God was like the sun. He shone upon the good and upon the evil equally. We could turn our backs upon him and walk in the dark if we wanted to, but he was ever ready to flood us again with his light the moment we turned back to him. My God bore no resentment. He forgave not only “seventy times seven,” but always – as Jesus evidently believed even man could do, and as I certainly knew I must try to do.

Moreover, no one can answer for another or pay the price for another. I am, of course, not denying that what happens to, anyone of us affects at least many others of us. I am not forgetting the extent to which we all are one. But my living, my growing, my dying, are my own. Also I see, or I do not see; and no other man’s seeing can possibly make up to me for my own blindness.

The kind of teaching we have had in the orthodox doctrine of the Atonement, to which men’s minds I and spirits have been exposed through long centuries, has simply cut the taproot of all moral and spiritual endeavor. Jesus is our substitute. He makes up for our shortcomings. He pays the price of admission. He “fixes it up” with God. In consequence men have ‘ tended to leave it all to him. The most striking thing about the life of the Christian Church today is the almost complete absence of any wholehearted attempt to put the teaching of Jesus into practice. For the most part, Christians are content merely to cry, “Lord, Lord.”

I saw the effect of this in my own preaching. Much of the idealism and moral ardor that came out even more fully in my life some years later was quite apparent even then in my sermons. Sunday after Sunday I would pour out my faith, my hope, and my conviction; and not uncommonly the people would come up and tell me what a fine sermon it was. But they did nothing about it. And naturally enough, as I see it now. They had been brought up on a teaching which represented that right life was less important than right belief, which almost asserted that the effort to live a right life was futile.

Moreover, while I know now that the teaching of Jesus can be practiced, here and now, it can’t be practiced by everybody. It never was intended for everybody. It can be practiced only by those who have the requisite spiritual perception and stamina, qualities that most people do not have. And then, too, for all my earnestness, as I can see now, I was not myself practicing what I preached. I may have been pointing the way, but I was not leading it. And people are not likely to take very seriously a way which even the man who preaches it does not follow.

Meanwhile, events in the world were hastening me toward the day when I should be forced to take positions that would drive me to do more than talk, that would give me experience out of which I could talk with more conviction and force than had ever been possible before.

* * *

[Editor’s 2009 note: This text applies to 1983] William Simpson, a member of the National Alliance, is now in his 91st year. He lives in retirement with his wife Harriett on their farm in New York’s Catskill Mountains.

Source: National Vanguard, March 1983, pages 20-23

]]> http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/one-mans-striving-part-1/feed/ 0
The Lesson of the Birds http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/the-lesson-of-the-birds/ http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/the-lesson-of-the-birds/#comments Sat, 25 Apr 2015 20:30:47 +0000 http://nationalvanguard.org/?p=3195 Scarlet Tanager

by Kevin Alfred Strom

ONE OF MY SMALL pleasures in life is bird watching, which gives me a great deal of peace in this world of constant conflict. Over the years, I have discovered that there is much to be learned from our avian neighbors, lessons that illustrate the laws of Nature that apply to us as much as to them. (ILLUSTRATION: Scarlet Tanager)

Recently, a listener sent me this article from the Richmond, Virginia Times-Dispatch entitled, “Songbirds in the Midwest are singing cowbird blues — Raising orphaned chicks wipes out foster families”:

The Midwest has become a disaster area for migrant songbirds and a paradise for a feathered freeloader who tricks other birds into raising its young.

Songbirds that fly thousands of miles from South America to nest in the forests of the Midwest are . . . → Read More: The Lesson of the Birds]]> Scarlet Tanager

by Kevin Alfred Strom

ONE OF MY SMALL pleasures in life is bird watching, which gives me a great deal of peace in this world of constant conflict. Over the years, I have discovered that there is much to be learned from our avian neighbors, lessons that illustrate the laws of Nature that apply to us as much as to them. (ILLUSTRATION: Scarlet Tanager)

Recently, a listener sent me this article from the Richmond, Virginia Times-Dispatch entitled, “Songbirds in the Midwest are singing cowbird blues — Raising orphaned chicks wipes out foster families”:

The Midwest has become a disaster area for migrant songbirds and a paradise for a feathered freeloader who tricks other birds into raising its young.

Songbirds that fly thousands of miles from South America to nest in the forests of the Midwest are being pushed toward population collapse by cowbirds that lay eggs in other birds’ nests and force the hosts to feed and nurture cowbird chicks.

A study to be published today in the journal Science shows that migrant songbird populations are in steep decline in the Midwest, and naturalist, Scott K. Robinson, of the Illinois Natural History Survey, says that parasitic cowbirds are the principal cause. Robinson said a single cowbird female lays eggs in a dozen songbird nests and then leaves them in the songbirds’ care. “The cowbirds hatch earlier, grow faster and then crowd out the host young,” said Robinson. “The songbird young just starve to death.”

Robinson said the cowbirds are thriving in the Midwest because the big woods have been felled for farm fields and pastures, depriving the migrant songbirds of the protection of the deep forests. The songbirds include tanagers, warblers, thrushes, flycatchers, and grosbeaks.

A survey by more than 125 researchers and assistants of 5,000 nesting sites in five states found that up to 50 per cent of the songbirds were not successful in raising young. This is not enough to maintain the songbird population at those sites, said Robinson. The survey was done in Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin, Illinois, and Missouri.

“These birds don’t have an evolutionary history of dealing with cowbirds,” said Robinson. “They haven’t learned to recognize that a cowbird egg is not their egg and that cowbird young are not their young.”

Most migrant songbirds, he said, “imprint on the young and take care of whatever is in the nest,” even if it is a cowbird chick. Some resident birds, however, won’t tolerate the freeloading cowbirds.

“The Baltimore Oriole will puncture a cowbird egg and throw it out,” he said. Robins also reject the cowbird egg. Both robins and orioles are thriving.

Robinson said that the study shows that the problem could be corrected by establishing a network of forests no smaller than 20,000 acres. This is the minimum size, he said, to give the migrant songbirds a haven from the cowbirds.

I’m amazed that the controlled media allowed that article to leave their presses in that form, but there it is. There are so many lessons to be learned there.

Here we have beautiful, brightly colored, noble-looking creatures with sweet poetry and music their art; threatened by ugly brown parasite birds, whose only distinction is that they can sometimes fool the beautiful ones into thinking that there is no difference between them.

Here we have parasite young crowding out the legitimate young in the nest. Have you seen a big-city classroom recently? Here we have parents spending their precious time and energy feeding and caring for the parasite young. Its parallel is the vast wealth and even lives which are squandered to “uplift” the forever miserable here or overseas. Its parallel is the Christian Children’s Fund and interracial adoptions fostered by our governments and our churches. We are digging our graves with a stupid — extremely stupid — smile on our foolish White faces.

The songbirds are dying as we will die. Some populations have fallen as much as 93% and experts are predicting multiple extinctions across this continent. As the warbler’s trill is replaced by the raucous cowbird squawk, so Vivaldi is eclipsed by killer rap.

What is the solution for the songbirds? What are the only hopes for their survival? One was mentioned in the Times-Dispatch article I quoted. It is the establishment of a habitat for the songbirds, to give the songbirds a “haven from the cowbirds.” The songbirds need — as we also need — and as every species needs to survive, a defendable territory of its own, where its parasites and other enemies are not present, where it can raise its own young, and its own precious and uniquely wonderful and beautiful genetic heritage will be passed on, unmixed, to the next generation. Without our own territory we perish. A nation that declares itself a melting-pot of all races will soon cease to be anything but a graveyard for its people.

Now songbirds could survive the clearing of the forests, if that was all there was to it. They nest reasonably well in meadows and near farmer’s fields. Change of habitat by itself isn’t fatal. It is that due to the clearing of their traditional forest habitat, they are now forced to share all their territory with cowbirds. In other words, they are being forcibly integrated with cowbirds. It is the integration with cowbirds that is fatal. Give songbirds their own territory, by whatever means, and they will thrive again.

A Discover magazine article last year mentioned another, more controversial solution advocated by some conservationists. In areas where the last remaining songbirds are now threatened, they are capturing and killing the invading cowbirds with poison gas. The results? I quote:

Some [songbird] species are in trouble …they’re raising too many baby cowbirds and not enough young of their own. Among the songbirds that have been pushed closer to extinction by cowbirds are the Least Bell’s Vireo of California, the Black-Capped Vireo of Texas, and the Kirtland’s Warbler of Michigan. The situation has forced conservationists into the uncomfortable position of advocating cowbird extermination programs.

“While we don’t like killing cowbirds,” says Jane Griffith, a biological consultant, “we do like to hear the songs of endangered species.” On a local level, at least, such programs seem to help. An example is the one that Griffith and her husband, John Griffith, have worked on at Camp Pendleton, a Marine base in Oceanside, California, that is one of the last refuges of the Least Bell’s Vireo. In the early 1980s, half the vireo nests there were parasitized. By 1994, after some 4,800 cowbirds had been trapped and gassed with carbon monoxide, parasitism had declined to 1 percent. More important, the number of male vireos had increased more than fifteenfold, from 27 in 1981 to 420 in 1993. Similar success has been reported by cowbird control program at Fort Hood, Texas, which has become a retreat for the Black-Capped Vireo.

Some bird species, especially orioles and robins, are thriving despite efforts by the cowbirds to parasitize them. They are thriving because they do not welcome the cowbirds to their nests. They are thriving because they defend their territory from invaders. They are thriving because they will puncture the cowbird’s egg and eject it from the nest. The Condor magazine, for August 1995, mentioned another species, Couch’s Kingbird, that has successfully resisted parasitism. What is the successful survival technique of Couch’s Kingbird? — Egg discrimination. What natural survival technique has been made into a crime and into a dirty word by our enemies? The ability to discriminate — which simply means to choose — sometimes makes the difference between life and death.

There are other amazing parallels between the cowbirds’ parasitism and our dispossession. Since they don’t have the burden of raising her own young, cowbirds reproduce at a much faster rate than other bird species. A single female cowbird can lay as many as 50 eggs in a single breeding season. Since welfare recipients are freed of much of the burden of raising their broods, they also …well, you get the picture. And you also know who carries the burden.

And as we are threatened by multiform parasites, both those already here and those flowing across our southern border, so are the songbirds. Read this excerpt from the Discover magazine article:

Meanwhile, a new threat to songbirds has surfaced — an invasion of another species of cowbird. Since 1985 the Shiny Cowbird of South America has been sighted in Florida. According to Alexander Cruz, a biologist at the University of Colorado in Boulder, it hasn’t yet been caught parasitizing nests, but that’s just a matter of time.

Ladies and gentlemen, I have am doing my best to bring you a lesson from Nature. For if we as a people continue to violate Nature’s laws, we shall surely perish.

* * *

Source: American Dissident Voices, February 24, 1996

]]> http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/the-lesson-of-the-birds/feed/ 0
Classic Audio: Igniting The Spark — An Interview With David Duke http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/igniting-the-spark-interview-with-david-duke/ http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/igniting-the-spark-interview-with-david-duke/#comments Sat, 25 Apr 2015 20:00:35 +0000 http://nationalvanguard.org/?p=3206 David_Duke2by Kevin Alfred Strom (2004)

Listen to the broadcast

Kevin Alfred Strom: TODAY WE WELCOME to the American Dissident Voices microphones Mr. David Duke (pictured), a man who has been raising the consciousness of European-Americans since the early 1970s. He was the first openly pro-White elected representative since the 1960s, and he garnered over 60 per cent of the White vote in runs for the Senate and Governor in Louisiana in the 1990s.

More recently, he has been the author of the books My Awakening and Jewish Supremacism and is just now in the process of being released from an imprisonment widely viewed as politically motivated by Zionist forces within the Bush Administration. Welcome to American Dissident Voices, David Duke.

David Duke: I’m so glad to be here, Kevin, and I’m very . . . → Read More: Classic Audio: Igniting The Spark — An Interview With David Duke]]> David_Duke2by Kevin Alfred Strom (2004)

Listen to the broadcast

Kevin Alfred Strom: TODAY WE WELCOME to the American Dissident Voices microphones Mr. David Duke (pictured), a man who has been raising the consciousness of European-Americans since the early 1970s. He was the first openly pro-White elected representative since the 1960s, and he garnered over 60 per cent of the White vote in runs for the Senate and Governor in Louisiana in the 1990s.

More recently, he has been the author of the books My Awakening and Jewish Supremacism and is just now in the process of being released from an imprisonment widely viewed as politically motivated by Zionist forces within the Bush Administration. Welcome to American Dissident Voices, David Duke.

David Duke: I’m so glad to be here, Kevin, and I’m very honored to be here. I’ve really admired your program and your commentary, and your dedication to our Cause for a very, very long time. It’s really a great pleasure for me to be on your program, and to share my thoughts with your audience.

KAS: It’s a pleasure to have you, David. Now you’ve been shut in for more than a year, but I know from our correspondence and our conversations that you haven’t been idle. What have you been doing during your involuntary sabbatical?

DD: Well, I feel like I’ve been in a monastery, in a sense — a very crazy monastery. I was in a room with approximately 72 other prisoners. I’d say 90 per cent of them were non-European — either Mexican or Black. You could imagine the amount of noise in that kind of facility; the kind of conditions that exist there. The bunks were only about 30 inches apart, so it was a very difficult situation. But, when you’re in prison, you’re basically stripped to your core. You go into prison and you don’t even have a wristwatch, you basically come in there with your skin and what you are inside — what’s in your soul. If you go into prison, and you have some strength inside you, you’re made stronger. If you’re weak, you’re made weaker. Prison, for me, was a very strengthening experience.

Being away from the physical pleasures of life — not eating tasty food, not having any of the basic enjoyments of even the small pleasures of life which we take for granted on the outside — causes you to examine your own soul, your own spirit, and to look for the really greater pleasures of life, the most important pleasures of life: and that’s really satisfying the inner longing we have in our genes, the values that we have, the beliefs that we have, the commitments we have in life. So, in a way, I was in a very obscure place; and I had a chance to do a lot of thinking. It was a monastery, but it was kind of a monastery in a zoo.

KAS: Last week I mentioned your Unity and Leadership Conference, which is coming up this Memorial Day weekend. I imagine that a lot of your time since you’ve been able to get back to your office has been taken up in getting ready for that. Can you tell us a little about that, and also about the purpose of the conference?

DD: It’s really twofold. The idea for it was begun by a lot of my friends here, who wanted to have a good welcoming home meeting for me. I’ve got many friends around the country, including yourself, Erich Gliebe, Dr. Edward Fields… So many people around the country and the world that wanted to welcome me back from the American Gulag, and I thought to myself, well, if we’re going to have this kind of get-together, this homecoming, we should also have a meeting in the process. An international meeting of Europeans and European-Americans who are involved in the struggle for the preservation of our heritage, our way of life, and our freedoms.

I also have been thinking for a long time over the years that we do need some sort of code of action between us, some sort of a code of conduct in terms of how we’re going to treat each other, an integrity that we’re going to have between our organizations. We don’t need to merge into one group — in fact, that might be a dangerous thing because if we all did get into one group, it’d give the Jewish supremacists a more clear target at which to aim, and it could destroy all of us.

European mankind is in an absolute crisis. We are literally being wiped off the face of the Earth. It’s hard for people to understand this and I’m sure there are some people new to the Cause and new to these ideas who are listening to your program, but they’ve got to get it into their mind that what’s happening here is an absolute battle for our survival.

European birthrates now — both in America and Europe — are about 1.25%. That means for every hundred European men and women, you only have about 68 children. That generation, at 68 children, only has somewhere around 40 children. In short, in four or five generations we go from a hundred European-Americans down to less than ten. We’re being wiped out — in the blink of an eye, we’re being wiped out.

KAS: Those figures don’t even take miscegenation into account.

DD: Exactly. And it doesn’t count the massive influx of Third Worlders into European countries. What’s happening is that, at the same time the people of European descent are not having children, a population explosion is going on all over the non-White world. And these people are not just staying in their own countries, but they’re flooding into European lands.

The reason we want to preserve our heritage isn’t because we hate these Third Worlders or these non-Whites that exist in South America or Mexico, or China or South Asia, or India, or wherever. We don’t hate them — but we certainly believe that we have a right to preserve our heritage, our way of life, our freedoms, our culture, our genetics.

KAS: We need our own exclusive living space to do that; do you agree with that?

DD: I think absolutely we do. And I think that can be worked out between the races.

I think one thing that’s been keeping us from coming to a fair agreement is the hatred caused by our pro-Zionist foreign policy. You know, I’ve been around the world, and of course I’ve traveled to the Arab countries. One reason why I went to the Gulag was because I went to Bahrain and spoke before a group called Discover Islam, which was an anti-Israel organization, and I appeared on al-Jazeera. In fact, the US State Department — and this is admitted in Newsweek magazine by the way, in their Periscope section of November 2002 — actually tried to prevent my appearance on al-Jazeera. They threatened the al-Jazeera network, and said ‘If you have David Duke on we’re not going to give you White House credentials, we’re not going to let you set up an office in Washington, DC in the United States, and so forth, which your network needs for credibility around the world.’

KAS: Sounds like they’re afraid of you — or somebody is.

DD: It seems that way, and the interesting thing was that the network didn’t cave in. The State Department never followed through on their threats, but they tried to keep me off the air over there. Within thirty days, I was prosecuted by the Justice Department in this case, and the pressure from that came out of Washington and Michael Chertoff’s office.

And Michael Chertoff was the same individual whom I had exposed for releasing the Israeli spies linked to 9-11. As most of your listeners know, there was a huge Israeli spy network in the United States operating before — and after — 9-11 and they were spying, very closely spying, on the so-called al-Qaeda individuals who were here, the hijackers. Five of these Israeli spies lived on the same street as Mohammed Atta, the hijackers’ leader, and five Israeli Mossad agents were arrested on a rooftop filming the attacks on the Trade Center and cheering those attacks. In fact, they were posing in front of the burning Trade Center flicking their lighters… you know, acting out “how great this is”… and I think there’s no question about the fact that there were early warnings to Israeli citizens in the Trade Center.

This has been exposed by the Washington Post and exposed by the FBI. There were early warnings to Israeli nationals who were at the Trade Center. I think the Mossad were completely aware that these attacks were going to go on and I’m certainly suspicious that they might have had something to do in terms of instigating these attacks through their infiltrators in the al-Qaeda network. I can’t prove that fact, but we do know, without any question, that the Mossad had prior knowledge that these attacks were going to take place. They treacherously let these terrible attacks go on, knowing that these attacks would better Israel’s situation and make America support Israel in its oppression of Palestinians.

They didn’t want me talking about these issues and these facts on al-Jazeera and throughout the world. The State Department tried to prevent me from talking about these issues.

I also exposed this war, as you know. And you did the same thing, so it’s not just David Duke. I traveled the world. I spoke at many international conferences in Europe, and I was well respected at those conferences. I spoke with Heads of State, ambassadors to major nations — they shared the podium with me — and I discussed the Israeli acts against the Palestinians, and I discussed this coming war against Iraq. I said from the very get-go that’s there’s no evidence that Saddam has any ‘weapons of mass destruction.’ If they did have evidence, they’d produce it; they’d have the inspectors go find them. I said that Saddam had no ties with al-Qaeda. I said this war would be a quagmire — it would be destructive to America. I said it would really help terrorism, and endanger America rather than help America, and that it would cost hundreds of billions of dollars. At that time Wolfowitz, and Perle, and the rest of this Jewish supremacist cadre in Washington, were saying ‘Oh no no, this is going to be an easy war; It’s going to cost 20 or 30 billion dollars, the people are going to welcome us with flowers, and this is going to be a great blow against terrorism.’ But, as you know, what this war has created is a hundred million young men around the world who are growing up dreaming of becoming a Bin Laden.

KAS: Our ideas, Dr. Pierce’s ideas, were revolutionary. I believe your ideas are revolutionary, and so are mine. We want a reordering of values, a new civilization based on the ideals of racial integrity, racial progress, and self-determination for Whites. Now there must be tremendous pressure on someone in the political arena, as you’ve been in the political arena, to water down those ideas and to say that we just want “equality” or “fairness.” How have you avoided doing that?

DD: First off, and let’s make it very clear, politics is a little bit different than a person presenting a philosophical idea. When you’re in a political race, what you’ve got to talk about — and this is just simple political dynamics — are the issues that are motivating the voters. When you’re in a race, you’re not trying to change fundamental perceptions of the world. What you’re trying to do is present specific ideas that are in line with your philosophy so that you can get elected and then present the entire worldview that you’ve got to present. In other words, every election has to be geared towards winning that election. At the same time, you can’t compromise what you believe.

I remember in the races that I ran for Senate and Governor, my whole speech wasn’t of course about the Middle East and Israel. People weren’t going to vote for me for Governor of Louisiana because of our Israeli policy. But if people asked me about Israel in the course of my discussions, I would talk about the fact that our policy in Israel was wrong — that it was hurting America, that Israel was a treacherous country, that it committed terrorism against our nation.

As far as fairness is concerned, I think we also have to consider our own approach on these issues. I don’t think that in my approach, in my desire to preserve my European-American heritage, that I’m being ‘unfair’ to Blacks, or ‘unfair’ to non-Whites around the world. I think what I represent is actually the best for them. I think the best thing for them, at some point, is to live in their own society where White people are not ruling over them, where White people are not determining how they live. They can make their own world, their own country, their own society, their own community, that can reflect their own deepest desires and values.

KAS: There must also be tremendous pressure not to talk about the Jewish question. However, far from being a typical politician in that regard, you’ve made that issue the centerpiece of your most recent work.

DD: It is the ultimate issue.

We have lots of different people in the movement. We have Jared Taylor, for instance, of American Renaissance, and we’ve got other people that are concentrating only on the racial issue, and that’s fine. Different people can take different approaches. But in my mind, the critical issue is the issue of Jewish power. Jewish supremacist power.

By the way, this is not simply Jews, it’s an ideology that these Jewish leaders have, and most Jewish organizations have. They believe that they have a divine right to rule us, to be supreme over us — it’s truly a kind of supremacy. It’s not separatism, it’s not egalitarianism, it’s a supremacist position. Judaism at its root is a racial supremacist religion.

Their power in media, and their power in government today (not only in America, but in England and in other European countries, though their influence is not as great as it is here) — influences every other issue. Whether you’re talking about gun control, whether you’re talking about abortion, whether you’re talking about world trade, or whether you’re talking about the Iraq war, or whether you’re talking about ‘affirmative action,’ this issue is the critical issue. Because by controlling our mass media to such a great extent, they’re able to dictate what happens. By controlling the politicians, they will dictate what happens — and not just on the issues affecting Israel, but on many issues affecting America.

For instance, a lot of typically conservative Americans — who are essentially very much opposed to this mass immigration which is transforming our nation into a Third World country — are very surprised to learn that the change in America’s immigration policy which resulted in opening our borders was almost entirely led and effected by the Jewish supremacists. Almost every Jewish organization was involved in this for more than 70 years. They started their work to undermine our immigration policy literally at the turn of the last century — the turn of the 20th century.So starting from around 1900, it took them 65 years. For 65 years they worked to destroy America’s demographic base, to make European-Americans into a minority.

In my book, Jewish Supremacism, I quote from many Jewish leaders bragging about the fact that they led this effort. They led it not only in terms of the actual Congressional legislation, they also led it from the standpoint of the media trying to popularize this opinion — trying to tell people in America that somehow multiculturalism was a great advantage, that it was going to be of great benefit to people — though we know that so-called multiculturalism leads to greater crime, dislocation, and, in fact, racial insensitivity. Racial tensions arise from it. A community’s sense of — well, a community’s sense of community — a community’s sense of brotherhood and togetherness and unity is destroyed by so-called multiculturalism. When we look around the world and we see multicultural states and multicultural communities, they tend to be far more violent, they tend to be far more disruptive. There’s a lot less love and a lot more hate in those kinds of environments, because it’s human nature: people are different. The people who have been the architects of this change have really been Jewish supremacists.

Unless we strike at that core ideologically, unless we expose the Jewish supremacist domination over our media and government, we’re really never going to have any victories in these other peripheral areas.

KAS: Now the very Jewish-controlled media you’re speaking of stereotype pro-White people as unthinking ‘haters,’ ‘bigots,’ and advocates of mindless violence. I’ve been talking on this program about how we need to avoid confirming those media stereotypes — especially since those things are not what we’re about anyway. We’ve discussed this; we are men of peace and justice.

DD: I think that’s absolutely correct. The media, for 40 years now, have been portraying White opposition to, say, forced integration of education or to ‘affirmative action’ or to integration as violent, hateful, bigoted — that kind of a presentation. And so a lot of White working people see this image on television and they think ‘Oh, you’re supposed to oppose this by standing up and yelling racial epithets,’ because that’s what the media say. And there are some people in the so-called movement, who call themselves White racialists, who are doing nothing more than presenting some sort of a Jewish version of what we are, rather than what we really are.

I’ll give you an example. There was an article recently on myself and on the convention, and they referred to me and to the people coming to the conference as “White supremacists.” That’s a term that Jewish supremacists have coined to label any [racially conscious] White person. I am not a “White supremacist” and I know that you’re not, because ‘supremacy’ means that you want to rule over other people. And none of us, none of the real thinkers and leaders of this movement are “White supremacists.” We don’t want to be ‘supreme’ over others. We simply want our own. Maybe White separatist would be a better term. Or simply White self-determinationist. Or White heritage advocate. Or White preservationist. But “White supremacist” is not what we are. We’re not trying to rule over Blacks or Jews or Mexicans or any other group. We simply want our own communities, our own society, to reflect that of our forefathers — what every other race on this planet wants. If we’re “White supremacists,” then the Japanese are “Japanese supremacists” and the Indians are “Indian supremacists.” We are simply White preservationists who believe that we have a right to preserve our heritage, our culture, our freedom, our land, and our values.

And the truth is — and this is what my book Jewish Supremacism points out — the real supremacists on this planet are the Jewish supremacists. Because they not only want their own state of Israel — and, by the way, they want to be totally supreme in that state and in the territories they conquer, where millions of people live under their thumb — they want to be supreme over our lands, they want to control our media, they want to dictate to our government what it does. Just as they dictated our moves in this terribly destructive Iraq war, which has done nothing but harm the basic interests of our country.

KAS: Besides their unity, one of the strengths of the Jewish supremacists is, as Robert Kavjian has pointed out, is that they constantly play on the emotions of the people. They didn’t just buy up the TV networks and immediately start pushing their multiracialist agenda, they entertained people with stories and comedies. They’re pushing the emotional buttons. How can we overcome that advantage?

DD: We have got to resurrect the spirit of our people. Our liberation — the European-American liberation — is in our genes. The same genes that are in every cell of our body were in the cells of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. They were in the cells of Davy Crockett at the Alamo. They were in the cells of Leonidas at Thermopylae, and Charles Martel at Tours when he turned back the Moorish invasion. We have inside of us the seeds of liberation and freedom. And we have the seeds to go to thestars. And we have got to present to our people a way that will bring out that passion, that beauty. Because what we represent now, and what we believe in, is truly the way to the stars — not only the way to freedom in terms of a decent land with freedom and decent schools for our kids and a clean, healthy environment, and all the rest of the things that are so important — but we’re talking about some of the most basic aspects of what life’s all about. And we have to bring out that passion in our people.

This is the analogy I always use: Islam came along in about the 7th century AD, and it fit the Arab nature. The Arabs were a bunch of warring tribes at that time, and they had tremendous conflicts and different religions. But Islam fit their racial makeup. And it literally spread across the entire world from the shores of Spain practically all the way to India in one generation. In one single generation. And that was a time of very slow communication and slow transport and travel — and no videotapes and no telephones and satellites and the rest of it.

I really believe that if we come up with the right formula, and we are able to touch the spirits of our people with the deeper meanings of what this struggle is all about, and if we show them the crisis that our people are in around the world, this crisis of existence, I believe that we can create something that will sweep our people faster than Islam swept the Arabs.

KAS: You’re talking about more than just emotions, now. You’re talking about something spiritual, David.

DD: Absolutely. Like I say, I believe that it’s in our genes. In the spiral of our DNA, I believe that we have a stairway to the universe. It’s a stairway to the stars.

We do have to look at the immediate threat to our people: the immediate losses that we’re taking in terms of victims of crime, and the terrible losses we’re taking in terms of our genes and our culture and our freedoms and our way of life. Look at the ‘Patriot Act’ — taking away the basic freedoms that we Americans have enjoyed for 200 years.

But we are also talking about something to aim at and to fight for. Because what we represent is something that’s beautiful. I hate to sound like some sort of a ‘liberal’ here, but it’s really based on the highest ideals of love and beauty. Dostoyevsky, who is one of my favorite novelists and one of the greatest writers of Western civilization, wrote “Only beauty can save us.” And what he meant was not just a surface physical beauty, but a beautiful vision — a beautiful ideal — and beautiful people. And that ideal in our hearts is what gives us passion. That’s what brings out the courage in men. And the only thing that can save us at this point is passion.

The hour is late. Our people are being driven to destruction. Every European nation has massive immigration. Every one has low birthrates. Every one faces miscegenation. Our enemies control our mass communication network. They’re involving us in this terrible ‘Clash of Civilizations’ which might end it all for us. We are in a position of crisis. The only way we can win is by bringing out the passion that’s in our people. But it’s in our genes. We have to touch the spirit in our people. Certainly we have the greatest Cause on Earth. We have a Cause that represents everything noble and great and beautiful in mankind. We represent a people that is exquisitely beautiful in form and spirit and culture. Look at the great art of Western Civilization. Look at the work of Michelangelo or DaVinci. Look at the writing of Shakespeare, the music of Mozart and Wagner. Look at the magnificence of our people. And all this beauty, all this greatness will be cast aside, will be lost forever unless we win.

We have lots of reasons to be passionate. We can look into the eyes of our children and feel this passion and this love. And that’s all we need. There are literally millions who we can reach with that passion.

And I’ve seen it. I ran for office in Louisiana, and finally someone had come along who defended the European-American, and the passion became contagious. At every other house across the state, suddenly there were 100,000 Duke signs that sprung up like mushrooms after the rain. This is what can happen in our lifetimes. In fact, this is what could happen this year, or next year, or within this decade.

And this is why this conference is so important. I hope that every patriot who is listening to this program will come down to New Orleans and meet me and meet you and meet Erich Gliebe and meet other leaders like Dr. Fields and John Tyndall, the founder of the British National Party, who is going to be there. Let’s forge a way to make a victory for our kind over the next decade. It’s feasible to win this cause in a decade. We just have to put together a formula that brings out that passion in our people — that love, that tradition, and that spiritual strength which is inside every one of us, if we just touch it.

KAS: David, I am sorry to say that we’re running out of time, but let me thank you now for being a guest on American Dissident Voices. And I thank you also for all that you’ve done for the love of your people.

DD: Thank you, Kevin. I admire your work and I look forward to seeing you down here in New Orleans very soon.

KAS: We’ll see you there.

Listen to the broadcast

* * *

American Dissident Voices broadcast, May 15, 2004

Source: National Alliance

]]> http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/igniting-the-spark-interview-with-david-duke/feed/ 1
Good News From Germany http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/good-news-from-germany/ http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/good-news-from-germany/#comments Sat, 25 Apr 2015 12:00:07 +0000 http://nationalvanguard.org/?p=3282 _81506524_81506523American Dissident Voices broadcast of April 25, 2015

Listen to the broadcast

by Kevin Alfred Strom

THIS YEAR, the gravediggers of our race plan to bring as many as 300,000 mostly non-White “asylum seekers” to Germany, the highest number ever — the equivalent of the entire population of St. Paul, Minnesota — and that 300,000 is just the number of official applications; it doesn’t even count the non-Whites who manage to sneak illegally into the country, nor their prodigious natural increase. (ILLUSTRATION: A participant at a recent patriotic demonstration in Germany)

Multi-cultis are the “controversial” ones now

When the small city of Tröglitz in eastern Germany was targeted as the destination of some of these invaders earlier this year, its citizens decided to fight back. Marches on an impressive scale — organized . . . → Read More: Good News From Germany]]> _81506524_81506523American Dissident Voices broadcast of April 25, 2015

Listen to the broadcast

by Kevin Alfred Strom

THIS YEAR, the gravediggers of our race plan to bring as many as 300,000 mostly non-White “asylum seekers” to Germany, the highest number ever — the equivalent of the entire population of St. Paul, Minnesota — and that 300,000 is just the number of official applications; it doesn’t even count the non-Whites who manage to sneak illegally into the country, nor their prodigious natural increase. (ILLUSTRATION: A participant at a recent patriotic demonstration in Germany)

Multi-cultis are the “controversial” ones now

When the small city of Tröglitz in eastern Germany was targeted as the destination of some of these invaders earlier this year, its citizens decided to fight back. Marches on an impressive scale — organized by the racial-nationalist National Democratic Party, or NPD — demanding that the city halt its plans to house the so-called migrants, were mounted. When Markus Nierth, the city’s mayor, said that Germans should “welcome” the invaders and that the city would refurbish an apartment complex to give them free housing, a new march through the city was announced. Its destination point: the mayor’s residence.

Nierth: Stepped down in fear after "welcoming" migrants

Nierth: Stepped down in fear after “welcoming” migrants

Nierth knew that most of the residents of his town opposed housing the “migrants” — and he also knew that, despite the fact that the controlled media and the occupation government of Germany calls them “neo-Nazis,” the NPD holds seats in regional parliaments and is supported by a large part of the citizens there. In the current atmosphere prevailing in eastern Germany, it was Nierth’s multicultural pronouncements that were considered controversial — not the NPD’s protests. Citing fear as his reason, Nierth resigned.

Tröglitz: Guess the "migrants" won't be living here after all.

Tröglitz: Guess the “migrants” won’t be living here after all.

But the multiculuralists’ plans to pollute Tröglitz continued. They continued, that is, until a person or persons unknown decided to set fire to the roof of the newly-fitted but empty building where the invaders were scheduled to be housed at German taxpayer expense, making it uninhabitable. The German caretakers of the building were warned beforehand so they would not be harmed — as admitted by Nierth himself.

Leading the resistance

Those who are trying to genocide the German people — and the White race as a whole — out of existence may seem to hold all the cards right now. They control the media; they determine national policy; they can imprison or ruin the careers of those who resist. But their position is much like that of Romania’s Communist dictator Nicolae Ceauşescu in late 1989, shortly before his overthrow and death: Despite his control of all the levers of power — the secret police, the military, the press, and the politicians — the people no longer believed in him or his lies, and his position was far more precarious than he ever imagined. So it is in Germany. Despite the fact that most of those 300,000 invaders will doubtless still be settled there, the German resistance is rising faster than the System can arrest and imprison its leaders. The resistance has won the hearts and minds of millions of people — and the results should inspire us all.

National Socialist poster

National Socialist pro-family poster

Within the lifetimes of some of my older listeners, the nation of Germany was the living embodiment of racial integrity, economic freedom, cultural self-determination, and eugenic progress. But deluded Americans, drunk on Jewish propaganda and not knowing that there had been a coup in Washington in 1933, were marched off to die and to kill in Europe — and, along with the equally deluded Russians, enslaved by the Soviet system — defeated the New Germany, which should have been the natural ally of scientifically advanced, eugenics-sponsoring, racially conscious White America.

But out of the ruins of that terrible defeat — and despite the occupation regime that has ruled there for 70 years — the spirit of German resistance to national and racial suicide never died. Today that spirit of resistance is growing stronger. And leading that spirit of resistance we find the NPD — the National Democratic Party of Germany.

When the NPD held a convention of racial-nationalists in Germany in 1998, Dr. William Pierce was there as a representative of our National Alliance. Udo Voight, the long-time leader of the NPD and now a member of the European Parliament for the party, gave an interview to National Vanguard in 1996 in which he made it clear that the NPD is far from just another glad-handing political party — and far indeed from the milquetoast “nationalists” who fear to express their own fundamental principles and so end up losing their own souls and even their reason for existence:

“I would describe the NPD as the only party in Germany which has a Weltanschauung [a world view]. The NPD acknowledges the laws of Nature, of which man is a part. This is the main point that separates NPD philosophy from the destructive philosophies of liberalism and Communism. The NPD also acknowledges the natural law of the inequality of human beings. Our beliefs are in clear opposition to the position taken by the established parties. We see man as a product of his genetic inheritance: a product which is only partly influenced by his upbringing and other social factors.”

Indeed. There was even a years-long period during which the NPD ditched all conservatism in its outreach program, and then concentrated heavily on education of its members, especially its younger members, in the fundamental principles of race and nationalism.

Beyond philosophy: real community

Painting in Jamel

Painting in Jamel

And it isn’t just in the philosophical realm that the NPD is different from other political parties. For many years they have been quietly and successfully doing what the courageous White American Craig Cobb tried to do recently in North Dakota, and which Dr. Pierce was beginning to do in West Virginia: build White racial-nationalist communities — communities where our values prevail and where a new generation of White children can be raised in a healthy environment.

Stefan Köster, head of NPD in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, and David Petereit, editor of MUPInfo, in front of Thinghaus in Grevesmühlen. The motto reads "Better dead than a slave."

Stefan Köster, head of NPD in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, and David Petereit, editor of MUPInfo, in front of Thinghaus in Grevesmühlen. The motto reads “Better dead than a slave.”

The controlled media and System politicians have only recently discovered this community-building on the part of the NPD, and they are wailing and spitting about it as is their wont whenever they discover that some of the goyim are onto them. Ilya Petrenko, a correspondent for Russia Today (RT) — a network which often exposes the crimes of Western governments but lately has been playing the “nazi” and “neo-nazi” cards most shamelessly in an attempt to position itself as “moral” and “anti-fascist” — hosted a program yesterday in which he “exposed” the village of Jamel in eastern Germany as a stronghold of “hate.” Viewed in the right way, the show was quite inspiring.

Signpost in Jamel

Signpost in Jamel

In Jamel, the vast majority of the residents are racial-nationalists and supporters of the NPD. In Jamel, there is a large version of the classic painting of the German family with father, mother, and three children — the same one used by the German National Socialists in the 1930s, and reproduced on the cover of National Vanguard magazine in the 1990s — publicly displayed on the side of a building alongside the words: “The community of Jamel — Free, Social, National.” In Jamel, a carved wooden Life Rune is prominently displayed. In Jamel, a signpost was erected near the roadway, showing the direction and distance to Breslau and Konigsberg (territories stripped from Germany by the victors in World War 2) — and also to Braunau am Inn, the birthplace of Adolf Hitler, the German National Socialist leader. The nearby community building of the NPD boasts a large red life rune, under which are the words “better dead than a slave.” One of the community’s leaders — who is now being persecuted for his political beliefs — is Sven Kruger, a local councilor and busnessman and NPD member. The often-seen logo for his demolition firm shows a man with a sledgehammer smashing a Star of David.

Life rune displayed in Jamel

Life rune displayed in Jamel

And this community-building isn’t limited to Jamel or Tröglitz. This is happening all over rural Germany, especially in the east, where corrupt “Western” influence is the smallest. The London Times wails about it in typical fashion:

‘Neo-Nazis’ secret plot to take over east German villages: Neo-Nazis calling themselves “nationalist settlers” are taking over small villages and towns and working as organic farmers, midwives and craftsmen in their latest bid to spread influence in eastern Germany.

‘Groups of fascist sympathisers are moving into towns they believe are susceptible to their influence in areas such as Lower Saxony in an attempt to spread extremist ideology to residents and create geographical strongholds.’

The neocon journal The Economist tells us that “Tröglitz is everywhere.” The Jewish Chronicle finds no fault with Jewish “settlers” in other people’s territory — but finds much to worry about when Germans begin to awaken again and defend their own ancestral lands. Their headline reads “Invasion of the Eco-Nazis” and reads in part:

‘German Nationalists are settling villages and towns in Lower Saxony and Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania in order to spread their hateful ideology among local communities.

‘With the recent rise of Pegida, an openly xenophobic movement, and the extreme-right Alternative for Germany party, the phenomenon of supremacists settling in former East Germany is attracting renewed attention from the media, politicians and watchdog groups.

‘A report published last year by the Amadeu Antonio Foundation, a human rights organisation funded by the German Interior Ministry, said that ideologues with fascist sympathies have unassumingly moved into sparsely populated towns and hamlets in a long-term attempt to create nationalistic strongholds. By taking up jobs as farmers, social workers or teachers, they hope to win new converts to their cause.

“They subvert village structures and spread Nazi propaganda over the garden fence,” explained Anne Schmidt, the author of the study.

‘The press was quick to dub them “Ökonazis” (“eco-Nazis”). But despite the attention they are attracting, the phenomenon is far from new.

‘”This has been going on since the 1920s. It was part of völkisch ideology, that was racist and antisemitic as well,” explained Robert Lüdecke, press representative for the foundation.

‘This ideology was based on the principle of blut und boden – the primal, unbroken connection between German soil and German blood. According to Mr Lüdecke, these ideas had a renaissance in the early 1990s.

Kruger company logo with sledgehammer crushing Star of David

Kruger company logo with sledgehammer crushing Star of David

‘Nowadays, neo-Nazis and other far-right families have bought up land in relatively obscure places like Lübtheen, Güstrow (an area associated with the far-right NPD) and Benz-Briest. “They are buying houses in these areas because they are cheap and they are inviting other comrades from all over Germany to settle there. And they say, let’s become neighbours, you can also work for the NPD, and we’ll raise some sheep and pigs and chickens.”

‘In Lower Saxony, nationalist settlers have gained a foothold in an area known for environmentalism. “This is a way that neo-Nazis try to get in. It’s like a door-opener for them. It’s a lifestyle that’s mainstream and modern for everyone. They work for the fitness of the clean German body. They also do weapons and resistance training in forests.”

‘Mr Lüdecke said that antisemitic conspiracy theories hide behind their criticisms of capitalism, urban life or even genetically modified food.

‘By cultivating good relations with their neighbours – villagers have been known to receive gifts of eggs and goat’s milk from the neo-Nazis next door – national settlers are often able to stay under the radar. “These are long-term projects. They’re preparing slowly without being recognised. They don’t want the revolution tomorrow. It would be OK for them if it came in 200-300 years,” Mr Lübecke explained.’

Britain’s misnamed Independent newspaper slavishly echoes the Jewish line:

‘A study entitled “Nationalist Settlers in Rural Areas” by the Amadeu Antonio Foundation, a human rights watchdog funded by the German interior ministry, says that neo-Nazis are taking up positions as diverse as councillors, volunteer firemen and teachers.

‘Anne Schmidt, the author of the study, told The Times: “This is a very scary movement to observe.

‘“These extremely nationalist right-wing people are settling specifically in little-populated areas, far away from cities to live and raise their children in a backward ideology.

‘“They subvert village structures and spread Nazi propaganda over the garden fence.”

‘The report states that this process has been going on “for years.”‘

Imagine that! The evil of it all — sharing eggs and non-GMO seeds and food with your neighbors. And telling them who is behind the destruction of their communities and their lives.

By all means, read the PDF of the “report,” even if you don’t read German. The pictures will encourage you.

We hope you, too, will take heart from the progress — and intelligence and foresight — of our German comrades. And we also hope that you will join us, the men and women of the National Alliance, in building White community right here at home.

* * *

You’ve been listening to American Dissident Voices, the radio program of the National Alliance, founded by William Luther Pierce in 1970. This program is published every week at whitebiocentrism.com and nationalvanguard.org. You can join and support us by visiting natall.com — or write to National Alliance, Box 172, Laurel Bloomery, TN 37680 USA. We welcome your support, your inquiries, and your help in spreading our message of hope to our people. Once again, that address is Box 172, Laurel Bloomery, TN 37680 USA. Until next week, this is Kevin Alfred Strom reminding you of the words of Richard Berkeley Cotten: Freedom is not free; free men are not equal; and equal men are not free.

Listen to the broadcast ]]> http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/good-news-from-germany/feed/ 3
Pantomime in Israel http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/pantomime-in-israel/ http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/pantomime-in-israel/#comments Fri, 24 Apr 2015 22:00:26 +0000 http://nationalvanguard.org/?p=3276 Herzog_and_Netanyahu

RECENTLY THE American news media have been fixated on the Knesset (parliament) elections in Israel. They have given it news coverage second only to US presidential contests. (ILLUSTRATION: Yitzhak Herzog and Benjamin Netanyahu)

The race was essentially between the Likud party of Benjamin Netanyahu and the Zionist Union of Yitzhak Herzog.

The US press described the contest as “exciting” and “too close to call.” At stake was whether Netanyahu would continue on for another term as prime minister, or whether he would be replaced.

In the event, it turned out that Netanyahu won an easy victory over Herzog, all but ensuring that the he will be able to form a Likud-dominated government.

But does it really matter?

Netanyahu is a obnoxious, dislikeable, Arab-hating, Jewish supremacist.

Herzog is portrayed as a genial, reasonable, Arab-hating, Jewish supremacist.

Netanyahu or Herzog: in terms . . . → Read More: Pantomime in Israel]]> Herzog_and_Netanyahu

RECENTLY THE American news media have been fixated on the Knesset (parliament) elections in Israel. They have given it news coverage second only to US presidential contests. (ILLUSTRATION: Yitzhak Herzog and Benjamin Netanyahu)

The race was essentially between the Likud party of Benjamin Netanyahu and the Zionist Union of Yitzhak Herzog.

The US press described the contest as “exciting” and “too close to call.” At stake was whether Netanyahu would continue on for another term as prime minister, or whether he would be replaced.

In the event, it turned out that Netanyahu won an easy victory over Herzog, all but ensuring that the he will be able to form a Likud-dominated government.

But does it really matter?

Netanyahu is a obnoxious, dislikeable, Arab-hating, Jewish supremacist.

Herzog is portrayed as a genial, reasonable, Arab-hating, Jewish supremacist.

Netanyahu or Herzog: in terms of policy, it is a distinction without a difference. On issues where it matters, such as beating the drums of war with Iran or denying the long-suffering Palestinians their just human rights, Netanyahu’s policies will be indistinguishable from those that Herzog would have enacted if he had been successful.

But image is something else. All in all, it is probably better for the non-Jews of the world that Netanyahu won. His abrasive, disagreeable personality guarantees to maximize anti-Semitism and anti-Israel sentiment. This will be especially true in America, where most people pay more attention to image than to content. Netanyahu is the personification of traditional anti-Semitic caricatures and stereotypes. Having him center-stage in world politics is a good thing.

* * *

Source: New Order

]]> http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/pantomime-in-israel/feed/ 2
Swedish MEP: Europe Having Borders is Like the Holocaust http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/swedish-mep-europe-having-borders-is-like-the-holocaust/ http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/swedish-mep-europe-having-borders-is-like-the-holocaust/#comments Fri, 24 Apr 2015 19:30:18 +0000 http://nationalvanguard.org/?p=3269 Cecilia WIKSTROM

by Steve Goode

CECILIA WIKSTROM (pictured), a Swedish member of the European parliament, is creating a Europe-wide campaign for “legal and safe routes to Europe” for illegal immigrants from Africa and the Middle East.

So in reality, what she is really calling for is the destruction of Europe’s borders.

Wikström went onto Swedish television network SVT to push the view that not assisting illegal immigrants is like the policy of appeasement during World War 2.

“There are more refugees in the world today than during and after the Second World War”

“People will ask the same question they did after the war: if you were aware, why didn’t you do something?” she told TheLocal.se.

“It is very controversial. I cannot speak for the government or disclose what they have said. What I can say . . . → Read More: Swedish MEP: Europe Having Borders is Like the Holocaust]]> Cecilia WIKSTROM

by Steve Goode

CECILIA WIKSTROM (pictured), a Swedish member of the European parliament, is creating a Europe-wide campaign for “legal and safe routes to Europe” for illegal immigrants from Africa and the Middle East.

So in reality, what she is really calling for is the destruction of Europe’s borders.

Wikström went onto Swedish television network SVT to push the view that not assisting illegal immigrants is like the policy of appeasement during World War 2.

“There are more refugees in the world today than during and after the Second World War”

“People will ask the same question they did after the war: if you were aware, why didn’t you do something?” she told TheLocal.se.

“It is very controversial. I cannot speak for the government or disclose what they have said. What I can say is I really wish for them to take the lead on this and put it into action as a national policy”

“Swedes will compare this to the Holocaust”

The only reason why anti-White politicians want to destroy Europe’s borders is because Europe is full of White folks.

You see, anywhere White people exist as a majority, there are these anti-Whites who want to force-“diversify” our schools, our homes and our neighborhoods.

What they mean by that is, no area can have a White majority . . . and they call this “progressive policy”.

However, when an area is majority Black or majority Asian – or any non-White group – no one says anything about it needing more “diversity”.

But if the anti-Whites in power are deliberately trying to make it so your children grow up to be a minority, is that not a genocidal policy?

It’s White Genocide, because they want to get rid of us.

* * *

Source: White Genocide Project

]]> http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/swedish-mep-europe-having-borders-is-like-the-holocaust/feed/ 1
Rand Paul’s Lesson from Aesop http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/rand-pauls-lesson-from-aesop/ http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/rand-pauls-lesson-from-aesop/#comments Fri, 24 Apr 2015 19:00:15 +0000 http://nationalvanguard.org/?p=3261 paul__rand-wailing_wall_tunnel_1-6-12_500x333

As a politician who has tried to appeal to broad swaths of the electorate — not just the Republican base — he’s opened himself up to an assault from all sides.

by Mike King

DEAR SILLY LITTLE Randy Pandy (as in panderer). TomatoBubble’s Anti-New York Times warned you that both factions of America’s PRC (Predatory Ruling Class) would ultimately turn on you. We told you to build upon your father’s coalition and reach out to independents and the disaffected. (ILLUSTRATION: Rand Paul inside Jerusalem’s Wailing Wall tunnel, showing his steadfast support to the state of Israel.)

But no. You insisted on collecting “brownie points” from the “Left” with your acceptance of inner city voter fraud, illegal immigration, and your disgusting photo-ops with that vile, murder-inciting, scum-of-the-earth, Communist rabble-rousing son of a ghetto skank, Al Charlatan.

. . . → Read More: Rand Paul’s Lesson from Aesop]]>
paul__rand-wailing_wall_tunnel_1-6-12_500x333

As a politician who has tried to appeal to broad swaths of the electorate — not just the Republican base — he’s opened himself up to an assault from all sides.

by Mike King

DEAR SILLY LITTLE Randy Pandy (as in panderer). TomatoBubble’s Anti-New York Times warned you that both factions of America’s PRC (Predatory Ruling Class) would ultimately turn on you. We told you to build upon your father’s coalition and reach out to independents and the disaffected. (ILLUSTRATION: Rand Paul inside Jerusalem’s Wailing Wall tunnel, showing his steadfast support to the state of Israel.)

But no. You insisted on collecting “brownie points” from the “Left” with your acceptance of inner city voter fraud, illegal immigration, and your disgusting photo-ops with that vile, murder-inciting, scum-of-the-earth, Communist rabble-rousing son of a ghetto skank, Al Charlatan.

Megyn-Kelly-Rand-Paul

Fox News Pundit Megyn Kelly gives Rand the ‘harsh’ treatment in a recent media interview.

You then thought you could fool Bloody Bibi Satanyahu with your “I Love Israel” shtick and your yarmulke-wearing act at Jerusalem’s Wailing Wall. Silly boy. Satanyahu may be evil as all hell, but a gullible chump he is most certainly not. His minions at FOX News are already eating you alive, as is the aforementioned “Left” TV station, CNN.

“He’s trying to be an all-inclusive Republican candidate. He’s trying to make everyone happy, but in doing so, he’s making everyone unhappy,” Republican strategist Ron Bonjean told CNN.

April 11, 2015

Both the Marxists and the Likudniks hated your father; and they hate you. Most of all, they hate us “isolationists” and “extremists” and “racists” that admired your father’s principled stands. Did you really believe that such pathetic stunts as your vicious anti-Putin hate letter, your advocacy of sanctions against Iran, and your patronizing stories about hard-working Mexican illegals you once encountered was going to win over the mainstream media and get you elected?

rand-paul-courts-israeli-leaders-but-stays-silent-on-chuck-hagels-defense-nomination

Exactly what did this accomplish for you, Rand?

Surely, by now, you know better. The problem is, Rand, due to your shameless pandering to both controlled factions of the PRC, your father’s passionate base of activists has gone lukewarm. Who will you turn to now? Oh sure, most of us who went ga-ga over your dad, and your 2010 Senate campaign, would still prefer you as the GOP candidate over pure filth like Bush, Perry, Fiorina, Rubio and Cruz. But if you think you’ll be able to resurrect the multi-million dollar ‘Money Bombs’ and the red-hot passion of Paul campaigns past, think again. Even if you were to make a strategic about face and boldly ditch your new “friends,” we just ain’t feelin’ it for you anymore, buddy.

DDailyIllustr

The legendary Greek philosopher and story-teller, Aesop, was so right in all of his fables, which is why they are no longer read in the youth insane asylums we call public schools. Here Rand; learn something:

A great conflict was about to come off between the Birds and the Beasts. When the two armies were collected together the Bat hesitated which to join. The Birds that passed his perch said: “Come with us”; but he said: “I am a Beast.” Later on, some Beasts who were passing underneath him looked up and said: “Come with us”; but he said: “I am a Bird.” Luckily at the last moment peace was made, and no battle took place, so the Bat came to the Birds and wished to join in the rejoicings, but they all turned against him and he had to fly away. He then went to the Beasts, but soon had to beat a retreat, or else they would have torn him to pieces. “Ah,” said the Bat, “I see now.”

batbirdsanimals

Aesop’s Fable of the Birds and the Beasts

Lesson: He that is neither one thing nor the other has no friends.

* * *

 Source: Obligatorio Recordar

]]>
http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/rand-pauls-lesson-from-aesop/feed/ 0
Francis Parker Yockey on Adolf Hitler’s Historical Legacy http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/francis-parker-yockey-on-adolf-hitlers-historical-legacy/ http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/francis-parker-yockey-on-adolf-hitlers-historical-legacy/#comments Fri, 24 Apr 2015 17:14:09 +0000 http://nationalvanguard.org/?p=3272 hitler_painting

by James Harting

THE AMERICAN political thinker and activist Francis Parker Yockey (1917-1960) is best known, and rightly so, for his magnum opus, Imperium: The Philosophy of History and Politics (1948). (ILLUSTRATION: The Hero of the Second World War) Yockey dedicated Imperium to “The hero of the Second World War” — who was none other than Adolf Hitler. And indeed, Hitler’s presence looms large over every page of that lengthy tome. But curiously, after that bold, courageous dedication, Yockey never again mentions Hitler, either directly or indirectly, in the book, except for a brief reference in passing on page 19:

…for the benefit of readers in 2050, I may say that the Hero and the Philosopher of the period 1900-1950 were both invisible to their contemporaries in the historical dimension in which you see . . . → Read More: Francis Parker Yockey on Adolf Hitler’s Historical Legacy]]> hitler_painting

by James Harting

THE AMERICAN political thinker and activist Francis Parker Yockey (1917-1960) is best known, and rightly so, for his magnum opus, Imperium: The Philosophy of History and Politics (1948). (ILLUSTRATION: The Hero of the Second World War) Yockey dedicated Imperium to “The hero of the Second World War” — who was none other than Adolf Hitler. And indeed, Hitler’s presence looms large over every page of that lengthy tome. But curiously, after that bold, courageous dedication, Yockey never again mentions Hitler, either directly or indirectly, in the book, except for a brief reference in passing on page 19:

…for the benefit of readers in 2050, I may say that the Hero and the Philosopher of the period 1900-1950 were both invisible to their contemporaries in the historical dimension in which you see them.

(Yockey’s “Philosopher” is Oswald Spengler.)

But Imperium was not Yockey’s only written work. In 1951, he published a second book, this time in German, Der Feind Europas, or in English, The Enemy of Europe. In it, he gives his assessment of Adolf Hitler’s “mistakes” — and Hitler’s legacy.

The following excepts are taken from an unfinished translation serialized in the the American racialist journal TRUD in the late 1960s and early 1970s.

After the conclusion of the Second World War, the opponents of the Hero of that war found themselves still dominated by his personality. Either they adopted his ideas and declared them as their own, or they continued to fight against them. There was no trace of a new idea independent of this Hero…

In the heroic era, no military test applies, not the test of “success” nor of anything else. It was Cromwell who inspired generations of men after him, not the later Stuarts who had his body torn to pieces by wild horses. It was Napoleon who inspired a century of leadership after him, not Ludwig XVIII or Metternich or Talleyrand. The heroic world stands immeasurably above the division of useful/useless. Cromwell won in 1688, long after his death and following disgrace. And in 1840 Napoleon had won, he whose name could be pronounced in Europe only with risk in 1820. The idea of Napoleon triumphed in the spiritual-political sphere, his personality in the heroic sphere. Who would accuse him now over the facts of the lost battles of Leipzig and Waterloo?

Such will it be with the Hero of World War II. He represented the new, aesthetic type which will form and inspire all coming leaders in the West. The lamenting after the Second World War about his “mistakes” was simply contemptible. Every journalist and big-mouth knows better than the great — they just would not have made this or that mistake. No, for they would not have been able to do anything at all.

Heroism is unique and cannot be wasted. As long as men survive, they will always be influenced by the Hero and his legend. He lives on in spirit and continues to take place in the world of facts and deeds.

It will be noticed that Yockey never uses Hitler’s name. Partly this is a rhetorical device and partly it is a propagandistic technique. But the repeated use of the appellation “Hero” also shows Yockey’s deep, heartfelt veneration for Hitler.

Francis Parker Yockey

Francis Parker Yockey

In his unpublished works and notes, Yockey does mention Hitler by name on a handful of occasions. In his essay “Life as an Art” (1940), he includes Hitler in a list of “higher men…unable to attain the herd-like comfort of lower men.” He lists: “Frederick II…Barbarossa…Wallenstein, Oxenstierna, Richilieu, Pitt the Younger, Napoleon, Metternich, Bismarck, Hitler…Richard Plantagenet…Mussolini and Spengler.”

In his notes “Thoughts Upon Waking,” Hitler appears again in a short list, this time of “ultra-masculine figures, like Cesare Borgia, Wallenstein, Olivarez, Richilieu, Napoleon, Bismarck [and] Hitler.”

Ideologically speaking, Yockey was a Fascist and not a National-Socialist. But he was like a number of other prominent men of his time, who while not followers of Adolf Hitler in a narrow political sense, felt drawn to him personally by his ineffable charisma. Others in this group include the German novelist Hans Grimm, Norwegian author Knut Hamsun and Swedish explorer Sven Hedin.

In this sense, although not doctrinaire National-Socialists, Yockey and the others were members of Hitler’s band of personal followers, die Gefolgschaft Adolf Hitlers.

* * *

Source: New Order

]]> http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/francis-parker-yockey-on-adolf-hitlers-historical-legacy/feed/ 0
Why Political Parties Will Not Save Britain From Extinction at Hands of Third World Immigration http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/why-political-parties-will-not-save-britain-from-extinction-at-hands-of-third-world-immigration/ http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/why-political-parties-will-not-save-britain-from-extinction-at-hands-of-third-world-immigration/#comments Fri, 24 Apr 2015 00:15:46 +0000 http://nationalvanguard.org/?p=3251 Politics Matters

Just as in America, the idea of changing or reversing anti-white trends through party-politics is a virtual dead-end in Britain. This also tends to be the case throughout all of Europe, unfortunately.

POLITICAL PARTIES and the democratic system will be unable to prevent Britain—and many other western European nations—from being overwhelmed by the Third World invasion because there are already enough nonwhites present to alter the course of elections, a new report by the Nova Europa project has revealed.

In a posting titled “Third World Invasion Figures Reveal Why Political Parties will not Save European Britain from the Nonwhite Invasion,” the Nova Europa project—which aims to help facilitate the creation of local Euro-communities in order to survive the Third World invasion—says that a new analysis from the UK government funded . . . → Read More: Why Political Parties Will Not Save Britain From Extinction at Hands of Third World Immigration]]> Politics Matters

Just as in America, the idea of changing or reversing anti-white trends through party-politics is a virtual dead-end in Britain. This also tends to be the case throughout all of Europe, unfortunately.

POLITICAL PARTIES and the democratic system will be unable to prevent Britain—and many other western European nations—from being overwhelmed by the Third World invasion because there are already enough nonwhites present to alter the course of elections, a new report by the Nova Europa project has revealed.

In a posting titled “Third World Invasion Figures Reveal Why Political Parties will not Save European Britain from the Nonwhite Invasion,” the Nova Europa project—which aims to help facilitate the creation of local Euro-communities in order to survive the Third World invasion—says that a new analysis from the UK government funded “Operation Black Vote” organization has revealed that the number of nonwhite voters in 241 of the 650 seats in the British parliament—and 168 of the most important marginal seats which will decide the next government—are so large that they will be the deciding factor in the May 7 election outcome.

The posting says that in practical terms this means that the Third World invasion of Britain has already reached such large proportions that it is now impossible to halt or reverse the flooding of Britain through any political party in the current democratic system.

The typographical error-ridden report from the “Operation Black Vote” organization (evidence in itself of the establishment’s already well-established anti-white racism, as any organization called “Operation White Vote” would be dismissed as “racist”), titled Power of the Black Vote in 2015: The Changing Face of England & Wales, Parliamentary seats and their voters, is based on an analysis of the latest census figures and nonwhite numbers in Britain.

Calling the nonwhites “Black and Minority Ethnic” or BME voters, the report stated:

“This report has analyised [sic] the BME electorate; voters who will be aged 18 years and above at the 2015 general election. As the Methdology [sic] page explains, we have calculated this data on the basis of the population aged 15 years and above in the 2011 census.”

The analysis showed that:

– In 241 constituencies (42 percent) in England and Wales, the “BME electorate” is larger than the 2010 majorities of the sitting MP when measured against the 2011 census and counting only the voting electorate.

– 168 seats equates to over a quarter (29 percent) of all constituencies in England and Wales. Therefore almost one-third of Members of Parliament can be voted in or out depending on the extent that they, and their party, appeals to BME voters.

The report continues:

“It is accepted wisdom in political circles that between 100 and 130 seats will determine the result in 2015. That means the ‘Black vote’ will undoubtedly have a major impact.

Powerofthe-BlackVotev3-5

“Many of the 73 ‘safe’ seats with a BME electorate larger than the MP’s majority are only ‘safe’ because the sitting MP and their party enjoy the support of the BME electorate. However traditional patterns of voting are changing as British-born decendents [sic] of immigrants increasingly make political choices independent of their parents and grandparents, so these seats – the vast majority held by Labour – may not always remain safe in future. This process will almost certainly increase the power of the ‘Black vote’ over time as an ever-growing proportion become floating voters.”

Marginal seats are defined as those whose sitting parliamentarians have majorities of less than 6,000, although a handful of seats with majorities of under 7,000 qualify for this definition because they have shown a propensity to swing between different parties from one election to the next, particularly if the seat changed hands in 2010, or they are targeted as realistic prospects by the main challenging party.

The growth of the nonwhite numbers in Britain is underlined by the fact that the previous similar OBV study, conducted before the 2010 election, found that there were “only” 99 marginal seats with a BME electorate larger than the MP’s majority.

The OBV report continued:

“The dramatic rise to 168 seats today (a 70 percent increase) is principally the result of two key factors;

– The significant increase in the BME electorate between the 2001 and 2011 population census, and

– The fact that the 2010 general election produced more marginal seats because it was a closer general election than 2005.

– A third, less significant, factor is the rise in Mixed Race voters in marginal rural and town constituencies where their population where [sic], though relatively small, nevertheless has an impact on primarily rural or semi-rural ultra-marginal seats.”

The report continued:

“If we counted the overall BME population, regardless of their age, the number of seats where the BME population exceeds the MP’s majority rises to 286, an increase of 10 percent or 27 seats. This is a significant indicator of the number of constituencies that will decide future election results.

“Currently 2011 census data for parliamentary constituencies is only available for England and Wales. When Scotland becomes available [sic] Operation Black Vote plan to update this report. It is expected that this would add more marginal seats where the BME electorate is larger than the MP’s majority.”

sol

The increasingly anti-white nature of the controlled media and establishment was highlighted once again when Operation Black Vote issued a series of advertisements in April 2015 to encourage nonwhites to vote in the May UK elections. The campaign featured a number of black celebrities dressed in whiteface. Of course, if any party or organization had dared to make an advertising campaign using whites dressed up in blackface to encourage white people to vote, then that campaign would be attacked as “racist.”

The report also drew a direct parallel with the United States of America, where a similar racial demographic swing has already taken place which has made it impossible for a party which appeals only to whites, to win power:

“It is interesting to note that former Conservative Party donor Lord Ashcroft has spent thousands of pounds studying the BME vote because Conservatives realised they cannot win a general election without this support.

“The experience of the last United States presidential election, when the Republicans were faced with the prospect of never winning again without gaining support of [sic] African-Americans, is a scenario that will increasingly also apply to Britain. No party can afford to ignore the BME vote or take it for granted.”

The manner in which the OBV report calculated the number of voters is also significant. As the report stated:

“Using the 2011 Population Census in England and Wales, this study has listed not just the overall BME population in each constituency but also included an adjusted figure for the BME electorate (voters). We made our calculations on two assumptions:

“1. That everyone aged 15 years or over in 2011 will be over 18 years by the time of the 2015 election;

“2. That BME people have a different age profile to that of the White people.

“We calculated that 26.81 percent of the BME population will be aged under 18 years in 2015, and that 16.14 perecent [sic] of the White population will be. We have factored this in to every figure of the BME electorate and Black and Asian voters.

“This calculation reduces the electoral impact of BME communities compared to simply assessing the BME population. However we believe this provides the most realistic estimate of BME voters in each constituency and, if anything, is likely to be an under-estimate given that numbers of BME voters will surely rise further between 2013 and 2015, and an older White population are likely to experience more deaths than a younger BME population.

“There are 40,427,470 White voters aged 15 years and over (83.86% of White total) and 5,757,304 BME non-White voters aged 15 years and over (73.19% of the BME non-White total).

“That means there is a gap of 10.67% between the percentage of White and BME non-White voters compared to the percentage of White and BME non-White citizens aged 0-14 years.

“There are differences between the age profiles of individual BME groups however this study has used the average across all BME groups. However it is possible that BME voters in small towns and villages in marginal constituences [sic] may likely to have [sic] a lower ratios [sic] of children to adults than inner city seats. Again our calculations may slightly underestimate the electoral impact of BME communities.”

Furthermore, the report points out, an “Analysis of the 2011 Population Census by constituency reveals that over one third of all seats in England and Wales have a BME population of over 10%, and one in five MPs represent a constituency where over 20% of the population are non-white.

“The figures reinforce the size and political influence of BME communities. In fact will be [sic] 20 BME-majority constituencies.”

These figures are the clearest indication yet of the rapidly changing nature of the racial makeup of Britain—and a number of other western European nations.

In practical terms, this means that the only way in which a political party could now hope to reverse this invasion process would be to win the vast majority—over 70 percent or more—of the white UK vote, and then implement a policy of forced repatriation of all nonwhites.

The chances of such a political earthquake happening are beyond the realms of possibility, given the nature of the democratic system, the power of the controlled media, and the increasingly degenerate nature of large sections of the white population.

Therefore, those who are concerned about this matter in Britain—and other similarly affected countries—would do well to start giving serious attention to the only alternative through which European racial integrity can be preserved: the creation of small local communities based on solid ideological and practical principles.

It goes without saying that such a process will only attract—and “save”—a tiny number of Europeans, and that therefore the harsh reality will have to be accepted that the vast majority of white people are going to perish upon their self-created racial funeral pyre.

But with enough foresight, planning, and preparation, it will be possible to develop a long-term survival strategy, based upon geographic consolidation and the principle of autarky, which will ensure that the European people will be preserved.

* * *

Source: The New Observer

]]> http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/why-political-parties-will-not-save-britain-from-extinction-at-hands-of-third-world-immigration/feed/ 1
Viral “Redneck Dixon White” Video is a Fake http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/viral-redneck-dixon-white-video-is-a-fake/ http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/viral-redneck-dixon-white-video-is-a-fake/#comments Thu, 23 Apr 2015 23:41:46 +0000 http://nationalvanguard.org/?p=3250 The name is fake, the accent is fake, the idea is rehashed, malicious, anti-White nonsense.

RIGHT ON TIME for the red-hot summer of hate which is a brewin, a video has gone viral posted by a self-described fat guy who calls himself “Redneck Dixon White” in which he claims America is institutionally racist and all of us poor white people have benefited from that institutional racism.

Yes folks, all us white people are enjoying the good life simply because we’re white… or so says a Latino guy named Jorge.

He says we have to “take responsibility” for racism. Us white folks do that is.

He makes these claims sitting with his eyes closed most of the time in his Ford F150 as if that buys him credibility in redneck land. He claims he likes hunting and fishing and drinking “beeEEeeer” . . . → Read More: Viral “Redneck Dixon White” Video is a Fake]]> The name is fake, the accent is fake, the idea is rehashed, malicious, anti-White nonsense.

RIGHT ON TIME for the red-hot summer of hate which is a brewin, a video has gone viral posted by a self-described fat guy who calls himself “Redneck Dixon White” in which he claims America is institutionally racist and all of us poor white people have benefited from that institutional racism.

Yes folks, all us white people are enjoying the good life simply because we’re white… or so says a Latino guy named Jorge.

He says we have to “take responsibility” for racism. Us white folks do that is.

He makes these claims sitting with his eyes closed most of the time in his Ford F150 as if that buys him credibility in redneck land. He claims he likes hunting and fishing and drinking “beeEEeeer” so therefore he must be credible.

He talks with an overly accentuated southern drawl almost to the point of it being an insulting cliche. The only thing he’s missing is some hayseed sticking out of his mouth or his sister/wife with a black eye in the back seat, washing dishes and pregnant.

When I first saw it I thought “this guy is acting” and he’s not very good at it.

And guess what?

He is an actor and director named Jorge Eugene Moran who hopes to parlay his anti-racism for white folks message into a movie deal which will finally make his life long dream come true.

UPDATE: Check out Jorge Eugene Moran’s earlier works like (notice he doesn’t have his fake southern accent):

  • The Mystery of Love  (completely WTF) from his school days.
  • The Other Side  (his black and white “art piece” in which he plays Mr. Death) looks much more recent

* * *

Source: Read full article at American Everyman

]]> http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/viral-redneck-dixon-white-video-is-a-fake/feed/ 0
Arman Talks About Whiteness http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/arman-talks-about-whiteness/ http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/arman-talks-about-whiteness/#comments Thu, 23 Apr 2015 17:23:43 +0000 http://nationalvanguard.org/?p=3235 Light in the cloudsand what he teaches…

as told to H. Millard

“THERE IS MUCH that I teach, but the most essential part that can be followed by all awakened Whites no matter what else they believe or don’t believe is: Whiteness before everything and anything else. No exceptions.

“This means, in simplest terms, that above and before anything else one puts first one’s own survival, expansion, happiness, self-determination, purity, evolution along a White trajectory, along with the right to live separate and isolated from non-Whites in completely White areas and nations. This applies to Whites as individuals and as groups and it especially applies to the DNA code that makes us, us. (Note: The Teachings say Whites are more than a race and are actually a separate species. Also, some Whites use the term . . . → Read More: Arman Talks About Whiteness]]> Light in the cloudsand what he teaches…

as told to H. Millard

“THERE IS MUCH that I teach, but the most essential part that can be followed by all awakened Whites no matter what else they believe or don’t believe is: Whiteness before everything and anything else. No exceptions.

“This means, in simplest terms, that above and before anything else one puts first one’s own survival, expansion, happiness, self-determination, purity, evolution along a White trajectory, along with the right to live separate and isolated from non-Whites in completely White areas and nations. This applies to Whites as individuals and as groups and it especially applies to the DNA code that makes us, us. (Note: The Teachings say Whites are more than a race and are actually a separate species. Also, some Whites use the term subspecies instead of race. However, the usual taxonomic schemes don’t go as far as our inspired use of the terms species and subspecies — largely because Whites can still produce viable offspring with non-Whites.)

“The belief system that I teach is moral and ethical and its values are the highest,” said Arman. “It is about living a meaningful, purposeful, happy, and fruitful life while being intentionally and fully awake. And it is about survival and evolution and it is also about reality and the ways of existence as they truly are and not as imagined by various humans over the ages. It is about things bigger and longer-lasting than us as the individuals we see in the mirror each day, and it is about the sheer joy of living and passing on our White essence to the many more that we make like ourselves from our own bodies. It is about right and wrong, good and evil. It says you as an individual come first and this includes your particular version of our White DNA code which made you, you and which you should pass on to as many children as possible during your lifetime. After yourself, come those who are most closely related to you and then to others not as closely related to you and then to other Whites. But the Teachings say your concern does not extend beyond Whites and that a wise person practices indifference and non-interference in the problems and affairs of non-Whites. They are not our kind and they have their own fates and destinies and we have ours. Do not merge, combine or confuse them. Stay White in all ways.

The Teachings come through me but I am just the conduit

“To me, the Teachings are my religion. To you, they may just be a philosophy or a world view or not even these. It matters not to me. My sacred obligation is to tell you about the Teachings and I do that in as many ways as I know how and through as many others as possible. One can believe in what is right and wrong for us as White people and not believe in any concept of a God or what I teach.

“If you live as Whites must live — in full Whiteness — we are one no matter what else you believe or don’t believe. If you are happy with your present religious or philosophic views then you may just want to stick with them. If you are not happy or if you think something is missing with them, then you might want to consider the Teachings. There is nothing to join, it is just a matter of reading, understanding, believing and most importantly living right and doing no harm or evil.

“The concept of God in the Teachings is as elusive as that which is behind the word. We don’t have the words to describe that which we sometimes call God but more usually in the Teachings we call it the First Cause and even the Unknown Cause or the Field of Existence and by other names. In trying to picture the concept in my mind I think of it sometimes as being like the dark matter and dark energy that the physicists keep trying to find or even like electricity or light waves or even like a fog that permeates everything or even like the air that we breathe and which is all around us but we can’t see.. I even think of it as a mind without the need of a flesh and blood brain, and that it may be something more along the order of what we see with computers with the difference being instead of the man-made parts of a computer, the physical components of the First Cause may be subatomic particles that come into existence and blink out again like Christmas lights and which may look like a spinning, spiraling cyclone. We sometimes think of the First Cause as a sort of will-o’- the-wisp, always there right in front of us but just outside the range of our sight. I often use terms like energies, forces, vibrations, frequencies, waves, and sub atomic particles when I think of this ineffable something — this ultimate reality — this framework behind existence — that we can’t fully understand except as it has revealed itself to us. Because it is ineffable, we spend more time on right living than on trying to explain that which we don’t have words to explain. If you feel awe when you experience storms, or in seeing photos of spiraling galaxies, or all the wonders of Nature right here on Earth, or when you hear certain music, and if you feel sheer joy about life — then you feel as we do. Ultimate reality can be found in the natural workings of Nature.

About me

“I’m a skeptic by nature and I rely heavily on reason. I even question the personal experience that set me on this path to learn and teach what I teach. First, a little about me. Before all else, always and at all times, I am White. I like being White. I am proud to be White. I do not apologize for being who and what I was born to be — White. I believe White. I live White. I bleed White. I vote White. I breed White. I’m a non-Jewish White person of 100% European extraction.

“I have blue eyes and had blond hair as a child. My skin is pale white and burns easily in the sun. My family was Catholic, but not very religious. I left that faith very young and never looked back. I don’t do drugs or drink alcoholic beverages. I have no mental illnesses, and my family has no history of such illnesses. I’m completely healthy and I function normally in society.

How it began

“Here’s the major event that changed my life and set me on the path. When I was a young teen, I was standing in a field on the edge of some woods and near a small stream far away from people, buildings, planes, and automobiles. It was springtime. There was no one and nothing around me but trees and wind-sown plants and the rest of Nature. Suddenly, some fast moving, low-lying, dark clouds came over me and a light rain started. Then, as I looked up at the clouds, they opened in an almost perfect circle above me–it was almost as though a large cookie cutter had suddenly just cut a hole in the clouds–and a beam of light shone through. I can’t be absolutely sure of the size of the hole, but it seemed from where I was standing to be anywhere from six to ten feet across, but that may be wrong because I wasn’t sure exactly how high the clouds were. The beam of light that shone through looked like sunlight, but was blindingly bright. At the very moment when the hole opened and the light came through I heard what sounded like many voices — dozens or maybe even hundreds — singing or repeating something — maybe it was a language or maybe just sounds — that I couldn’t make out. It didn’t sound like English or any other language I’ve ever heard and it may not even have been a language. It was beautiful, though and I was awestruck. Then, and I’m not sure how much time elapsed — maybe minutes, maybe hours, I don’t know — the hole closed, the singing stopped, and all that was left was the clouds.

“Space aliens, lost time? First Cause? I don’t know. But, I am absolutely convinced beyond a doubt that during that experience something was awakened in me or was changed in my subconscious brain or body or my DNA or something (like a computer program or software?) was downloaded into me. I accept it as a mystical or religious experience and even if this was a UFO encounter of some sort, I believe those behind it were motivated or manipulated or commanded to do what they did from a higher source. I believe I was selected, either just because I happened to be where I was at that time or maybe for some other reason unknown to me, maybe because of something in my DNA. There is more to this including some odd ‘coincidences’ that have happened over the years, but the above is the seminal event.

My quest

“At any rate, that event sent me on my search for ultimate meaning and for answers to the big questions of existence. It felt as though I was being tested to see if I could find the truth instead of just being told it. And I was led in a direction toward Whiteness before all else. I have received inspiration when needed and I’ve been saved from harm and death several times by subtle means. And I have received messages which I write down. As I stand back and try to use my reason to look at that event and where it has led me, I know without a single doubt that the messages I receive are being given as a correction to the direction in which humanity is moving; which is away from the light and good and toward darkness and evil. The messages are being specifically given to save White people and to have us expand and evolve along a White trajectory. This is not the stuff of the Bible or any other religious teachings you may be aware of. This is new and at the same time it is from the ancient source and comes from the beginning of existence.

“The primary message can be stated very simply: We must become more White and more numerous.

The bottleneck

“The messages are clear that we are the selected ones who must do the will of the First Cause to save mankind from destruction by becoming the new mankind. We must multiply our White kind and only our White kind. We must separate and isolate ourselves from other types of humans and avoid all gene flow from them to us or from us to them. And we must even try to avoid places where they leave their DNA even if that DNA is just from a fleck of skin or a fingerprint. Their trajectory is not our trajectory and there is a bottleneck coming. This bottleneck may bring the destruction of all humans but the purest Whites. Whites are the replacement for all other human types just as present-day humans were the replacements for Neanderthals and other earlier types.

“A message that we Whites are to ‘expand always, contract never,’ keeps coming through. Another message that comes through often is: ‘Our God is the God that your god would worship if your god were real.’

“Another message says that we must have Right Blood, Right Belief, and Right Action to purify and move forward on the path. This means, in the first instance, that we must be born White. Nothing is possible without this. Being born White means we have the right parts in our DNA code. It is the key to taking the path and moving ever higher and evolving ever closer to the First Cause. There is no other way to be one of us. But, Right Blood is dormant or sleeping without Right Belief and Right Action. Right Belief means a belief in Whiteness. Right Action means living the right way as a good and righteous person intentionally living Whiteness. None of us are fully pure. We must purify. There is no guarantee of how many of us will get through the bottleneck for there are among us those who are evil and who hate themselves and other Whites. They have much impurity in their DNA codes and their false ways and teachings can infect the best of us if we let down our guard. They are weak seeds and are White on the outside but not White on the inside.

The easy but wrong way

“The easy way for Whites today is to go along to get along. This means that we would avoid the hate of others if we simply gave in to the evils that lessen us, such as miscegenation, mixing with non-Whites, not having as many White children as we can, aborting pure White babies and the rest of the evils that keep our numbers low. This takes no effort and no struggle on our part. However, we must not go that way. That way lies our genocide and extinction. That way lies our blending and assimilation back into non-White humanity. That way stops our evolution along the White path. We must exert effort and we must struggle mightily against the evil even if everyone hates us. In fact, having them hate us can actually help us so long as they don’t harm us. Their hate will help us circle our wagons and remove ourselves from the presence of non-Whites and weak seed Whites who look White on the outside but who are not White on the inside.

There are many terms in the Teachings that should be defined so there is no misunderstanding. Here are just a few:

Whiteness means white skin and white DNA and genes and it means everything that is essentially what we are as White people. I use lower case ‘w’ to refer specifically to the color white and upper case ‘W’ to refer to White people; and in this latter sense it means the same as Aryans or non-Jewish White Europeans or those who are born of two White parents who were also born of two White parents who were also born of two White parents. I also refer to such people as Pure Whites even though ‘pure’ is not totally accurate since we all evolved from earlier forms and got the core of our DNA code that reads ‘life’ from that first molecule of DNA that made the leap from so-called non-living minerals to become the living minerals that all life is.

“We all carry, to varying degrees, ‘original sin,’ which in reality is bits of DNA code that are discordant and which we’ve inherited because of miscegenation in ancient and more modern times and which we must remove to purify even more so that we can move ever higher along the purely White evolutionary trajectory and so we can tune in to the First Cause. Our unique DNA code can be thought of as being partly like a radio receiver and transmitter and the First Cause can be thought of as being a little like radio waves that are all around us but which we can’t pick up unless we have the right parts in our DNA and tune in to the right frequencies. Our largest organ which is our bodily covering — our skin — MUST be White. It is completely necessary for us to be white externally and White internally and in all ways for our skin to work as our ‘antenna.’

“Pure Whites are more than a race, although I will often use that term to be understood when necessary. No matter what corrupted science now believes, Pure Whites are already a different species from other humans, and once we purify a little and end gene flow from all non-Whites to us, we will soon be free of the danger of their genes harming us as we evolve as we must so that we will not be able to bear viable children with them. This is the next great biological leap for Pure Whites. After that, there will be many more leaps because evolution never ends. We are on the verge of being the next human — fully a new species — looking much as we do now, but just a little smarter, a little more clever, a little stronger, a little more healthy, having a little more intuition, and not being able to have children with any types of non-Whites. In other words, we are on the threshold of being what writers and philosophers in the past have sometimes called the Ubermensch or the Superman.

“By ‘good’ and ‘bad,’ or ‘good’ and ‘evil,’ I mean that good is what helps our survival, our proper evolution into a new species incapable of bearing children with non-Whites, and our expansion both as individual Pure Whites and as our whole species.. What is bad or evil is not good for Whites or for our survival, our proper evolution, and expansion.

first-things-first

“Any church, religion, philosophy, government, world view or way of life that puts anything, including, but not limited to, their idea of divinity or what is moral or just, above White genes are not ones to follow for Pure Whites. They are death for us. I once had an argument with a White man who claimed to be a White nationalist. However, he put his version of Christianity above Whiteness and even said that he would accept a Black under his roof and would even let him marry his daughter if he were a Christian, but that he would bar the door to a White who was not a Christian and who might be a pagan or an atheist or who followed one of the explicitly White religions — such as what I teach — and would not let him marry his daughter. This is an inversion of what is ethically and morally right for Pure Whites and is an abomination and a perversion of the First Cause’s commands to us as Pure Whites.

“To be absolutely clear: I put Whiteness (and I mean by this everything that benefits Whites) above everything else. I am commanded to do so. It is not open for debate. Nothing trumps Whiteness. And, nothing ever will. Pure Whites have been selected for a special purpose and we have special responsibilities on us to remain pure and to multiply our kind in pure form so that we fill all of existence with our special and unique DNA code and that this will uplift mankind and lead to a better world. This is a heavy responsibility that is put on us and one that will cause evil doers who hate all that is good and just and of the light and White to hate us and try to destroy us. We will resist and we will struggle to bring in the good and defeat the evil, and First Cause willing, we will prevail. We are not alone, we Pure Whites. We never are. The First Cause is on our side so long as we do the right things.

The eternal gene wars

“I see the world as White and non-White. In the eternal gene wars, there are no good non-White genes, as ‘good’ is related to our genes. By this I mean that any genetic codes that are non-White, and which are carried by those who can mate with us and produce viable non-White children by invading and using our DNA code, automatically compete with our White genes. This is miscegenation which I also call bedroom genocide because that is what it is for us Whites. In reality, the eternal gene wars are Nature’s way of natural selection and evolution. It happens with all genes in all organisms and has no evil or bad intent and it often happens on a subconscious level. However, we Pure Whites are at the point in our evolution where we must now steer our evolution along the White path and not simply accept the defaults of natural selection.

“We must live now awaken and live intentionally so that we take over from the blind workings of Nature and not only do not go extinct, but evolve ever higher.

“We must be aware every moment of our lives that we are in eternal gene wars and we must act to win the gene wars. We must live Whiteness and we must make all of our decisions based on what is right for OUR genes, alone. If it is good for Whites and our genes (and the two are one), then it is good. If it is bad for Whites and our genes, then it is bad.

“As individuals we can do little more than try to tell other Whites about these things and they must choose for themselves. That is our duty and our obligation: Expose other Whites to the truth as taught in the Teachings and in similar systems of Whiteness and we must do it in ways that others understand. We must always consider the audience. But as we meet this obligation, we must never forget that even if others are blind to the truth and are not receptive, that’s not our problem. We have done our part to try to save them and that’s all we can do.

“And, we must always remember that it is we ourselves who must do what is right and that it is we ourselves who must live right and breed White to our fullest, for we really have no control over anyone but ourselves. Each one of us is THE ONE. Each of us must be self-reliant, self-sufficient, and have self-determination. We, each one of us, must be able to stand alone and do the right things and live the right way even if no one else does.

“And, just what is good and bad? Anything that helps purify White genes and expand and multiply them is good. Anything that makes White genes less pure and contracts them is bad. And, for us as individuals, this means that what is good for us as individual Whites is good and what is bad for us as individual Whites is bad. We do not follow false ethical or moral codes that say that what is good or bad for ‘society’ — or for a nation or a culture or for people unlike us — determines good or bad. That way leads to false beliefs and actions and can lead to sacrificing oneself so that the genes of others can win the gene wars. Avoid this at all costs. YOU must live to breed Pure White. You must love life and you must not die young.

“Whites need a spiritual revival. And, by this I mean a revival of our sense of self and group worth and a love of life that causes us to have more of our White children.

“But it all begins with one. I am one. So are you. So is each of us. Each one of us must use our minds to reject the negative, death attitudes that so afflict our people. We must not simply waste our time waiting to die of old age. We must, each one of us, become the new spring. We must start breeding once again. We must find Whites of the opposite sex who will help us release the armies of us that are within our bodies. We must fill all lands with our sacred DNA code that is a spark from the First Cause. We must save the world as the only ones selected to do so and which can only be done via our sacred DNA code which contains a spark from the First Cause.

Why are you alive?

“Why are you alive? Each of us is alive so we can make more like ourselves. You are not alive to be a dead hero who has never made more like yourself. Avoid danger, don’t try to be a hero. Don’t go to war for false causes. Try to be a good and decent person and practice the Golden Rule. Do not interfere in the affairs of non-Whites. Be indifferent to them. Be polite, but avoid mixing with them. Never miscegenate. Do not practice birth control. Do not abort fully White babies. Do not commit suicide. Do not harm other Whites. Live as long as possible to produce as many Pure White children as possible. Remember, we are not born as couples but as individuals. You, as an individual White male or individual White female, must find ways to pass on your particular DNA code to as many new fully White children as possible. It is an individual responsibility, not a couple responsibility. All forms of White relationships, marriages, contracts, agreements that meet this goal are good. All that do not meet it are bad. Your nation, your religion, your philosophy are all within you and are one with your DNA code. They are not to be found in artificial things.

Living right is more important than belief

“These are some of the things that I am commanded to teach. They are true and they are from the First Cause. The Teachings are not open to debate or argument. They are not voted on. They cannot be changed and they do not rely on consensus or polls. They are as given, and while the words are our human words, the principles and meanings behind the words that caused these words to be written are from the First Cause. Period. One accepts the essential parts of them, or one does not — and one lives right, or one does not. Those with the right DNA parts will naturally gravitate to the Teachings if they are correctly exposed to them. Those who lack the right DNA parts won’t. This is as how it should be. It helps our process of purification and evolution. The Teachings are compatible with all other explicitly White teachings so long as they put Whiteness as outlined here before all else.

“As I said, this is my religion. This is what I believe. This is how I try to live. It is also a philosophy of life and stands complete and whole if just taken that way. If you want to join various organizations and groups that promote their own versions of Whiteness that’s up to you and it’s usually a good thing to join together with others with similar beliefs. However, any organization, religious or otherwise, that veers from Whiteness before all else, is not one for us to follow because it is a false way and harmful to us either in the short term or the long term. All I present here and elsewhere, and which I am commanded to do, is the Teachings. This is my responsibility: to tell other Whites of them and they, with their free will, can decide for themselves. To be clear, the Teachings are not an organization, but are revelations, philosophical positions and inspired instructions on how we should live as fully functioning and explicit White people. They do not promote violence or law breaking and they do not demand blind belief. They do include much about evolution, but they do not worship evolution. Some see the First Cause as God. Some see the First Cause as the natural workings of Nature. The First Cause is the ender of all arguments. His/Its Will is law.

We are to be a kind, righteous and just people always looking for the moral and ethical ways

“We are to be a kind, righteous and just people and to those who mean us no harm we are to be as polite and kind as they are to us, and we are to try to speak softly and be fair and honest to all humans who we come in contact with. However, turning the other cheek against those who mean us harm is not part of our tradition or beliefs. Our Golden Rule is ‘Treat others as they treat you. Good to the good, bad to the bad.’

“We are to believe strongly in non-interference in the business of non-Whites and to practice indifference to them. Their paths and destinies are theirs and ours is ours and they shall not meet.”

(© 2015 H. Millard)

* * *

“Millard is an original. His books aren’t like your typical fiction. If you don’t know where to put his books, try the same shelf with Kerouac, Kafka, Sartre and Nietzsche…”

Ourselves Alone & Homeless Jack's Religion Ourselves Alone & Homeless Jack’s Religion messages of ennui and meaning in post-American America by H. Millard In Ourselves Alone and Homeless Jack’s Religion, H. Millard, the hard-to-pigeonhole author of The Outsider and Roaming the Wastelands, has put together some of his category-bending commentaries on post-American America. The commentaries deal with politics, philosophy, free speech, genocide, religion and other topics; all in Millard’s edgy style. They lead up to Homeless Jack’s Religion, in which Homeless Jack lays out revelations he found in a dumpster on skid row. Click here to buy. ISBN: 0-595-32646-3
Roaming the Wastelands ROAMING THE WASTELANDS– (ISBN: 0-595-22811-9) H. Millard’s latest sacred cow toppling book, is now available at Amazon.com by clicking on this link or by calling 1-877-823-9235. “A fun–and sobering–thing to read” – Alamance Independent
The Outsider THE OUTSIDER – (ISBN: 0-595-19424-9) H. Millard’s underground classic story of alienation is available at Amazon.com by clicking on the this link or by calling 1-877-823-9235.

 

]]> http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/arman-talks-about-whiteness/feed/ 0