Classic EssaysWilliam Pierce

The End of Patriotism


by Dr. William L. Pierce

YOU KNOW, what Madeleine Albright and the rest of the Clinton gang are doing in Yugoslavia is really something new, and it’s taking me a while to become accustomed to it. This is the first time I’ve ever hoped that American bombers would be shot down or American ships sunk. It’s a strange feeling, and I don’t really like it.

I remember back during the Vietnam war how I despised people like Jane Fonda and Bill Clinton, who carried Viet Cong flags and demonstrated in favor of America’s enemies, at a time when the Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese were killing an average of 100 young Americans every day. I never was enthusiastic about American involvement in Vietnam, but since we were involved I thought that we ought to win as quickly as possible and then get out. And of course, our opponents then were communists and they were non-White; I had no objections at all to killing them. And there was still the pretense that the war was a patriotic effort, an effort to protect America’s national interests. Certainly, that’s the way most of our troops felt about it. They felt that they were fighting on America’s behalf, they felt patriotic, and they certainly resented the scorn directed at them by the pro-Viet Cong demonstrators over here.

How different Madeleine Albright’s war against Serbia is! There’s not even a pretense that killing Serbs is serving America’s interests. The war against Serbia is the first war of the 21st century, the New World Order crowd is proclaiming. Defending national interests is out of fashion now. The fashionable thing now is to use multinational mercenary forces to compel other countries to conform their internal policies to the wishes of the New World Order folks or to rearrange boundaries to suit New World Order schemes. The people who’re running this war — nominally Clinton, but actually the gaggle of Jews he appointed to be in charge of America’s foreign policy and national security after his re-election in 1996 — never approved of patriotism, anyway. They always sneered at it. They were the crowd cheering for the Viet Cong back in the 1960s and 1970s. Now they’re cheering for NATO.

They were never patriotic Americans themselves, even after they had been here five or six generations, but in the past they at least tried to use our patriotic feelings to get us to do their killing for them: in the Second World War, for example. Now they’ve decided that they can drop any pretense of patriotism. Now they believe that we’ll simply fight whomever they pay us to fight. As I said, that’s something I’m having a hard time becoming accustomed to.

The yahoos at the VFW clubs certainly will not understand this, but in fact Madeleine Albright’s war against Yugoslavia has profound implications for the relationship between the citizens of a modern state and their government, and for the relationship between civilians and soldiers. Prior to the 20th century the concept of patriotism was generally understood to be the “family” feeling — a blend of affection and loyalty — one had for one’s fatherland, the land of one’s ancestors. A related concept was that of nationalism, the family feeling that one had for one’s nation: which is to say, for one’s people. The etymology of the word implied that one’s nation was one’s extended biological family: everyone in the nation was related by birth. If a nation had occupied a given geographical territory for a long time, then the two concepts were practically interchangeable.

Patriotism was much more than an intellectual construct; it was closer to an instinct. It was bred into a people because it had survival value. A tribe which could depend on the loyalty of its members was much more likely to survive than one which could not. Thus also the strong taboo against treason.

When North America was settled by Europeans in the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries, the meanings of patriotism and nationalism were strained a bit. Fairly soon, however, the descendants of immigrants from Germany, Ireland, Scotland, England, Norway, Poland, Italy, and other European countries developed a new sense of patriotism. There was enough similarity among the European immigrants to North America that one might even say that a new nation came into being, and with it a feeling of affection and loyalty for America and the American people.

There were exceptions, of course. While most Swedish, French, and other European immigrants soon transferred their loyalty from the land of their ancestors in Europe to the new land in America, non-European groups as a rule did not. Gypsies still thought of themselves first and foremost as Gypsies. And Jews remained Jews, with a loyalty only to the Jewish people, wherever they might live.

This transfer of loyalty on the part of European immigrants gave America the cohesion it needed to grow and prosper. Unfortunately, it also provided a handle for the Jews and their collaborators to use in manipulating public opinion in America and setting America against Europe in two fratricidal and horribly destructive world wars in this century. Patriotism is a powerful force even when it is misguided. Governments can use it for purposes which are not in the interests of the people. Even when the Jews don’t have a hand in things, there still can be bad governments and unnecessary wars, but no government is likely to deliberately and consistently work against the interests of its own people over an extended period. The Jewish presence in America in the 20th century, however, has resulted in patriotism being used against the interests of the American people in a systematic way, at least through the Vietnam war.

Incidentally, recently published statistics from the Vietnam war provide powerful support for the suspicion which always has existed that, though Jews may manipulate the patriotic feelings of the rest of us, they themselves retain their own Jewish patriotism and do not share our patriotism. If one counts Stars of David in military cemeteries from the Second World War, one finds them conspicuously underrepresented in the fields of crosses.

In a book published just last year, Stolen Valor, a study of the Vietnam war and its veterans, B.G. Burkett and Glenna Whitley cite a 1992 study of Department of Defense records by Massachusetts Institute of Technology Professor Arnold Barnett and West Point’s Captain Timothy Stanley which provided much more precise data on the matter of Jewish patriotism. Draft-age Jews in America, it turns out, suffered losses in Vietnam at a rate less than one fifth their proportion of the population. This was not simply a matter of rich boys avoiding service while poor boys got killed: young White men — that is, White Gentiles — from high-income families suffered approximately the same overall casualty rate as low-income Whites. Although some high-income Whites avoided the draft as university students, Whites from high-income families made up most of the officer corps, which suffered a disproportionately high casualty rate, and the average death rate for high-income Whites was nearly the same as for low-income Whites.

For Jews, however, the difference is striking: making up slightly over 2.5 per cent of the population, Jews accounted for only 0.46 per cent of the GIs killed in Vietnam. This remarkable difference reflects a remarkable difference in attitudes between Jews and Whites.

Even as late as the Vietnam war, with Bill Clinton and his Jewish and leftist friends demonstrating for the Viet Cong, traditional American patriotism remained a powerful force. Most young White men still looked on military service in time of war as a patriotic duty. Phrases such as “serving your country” were still taken seriously. There was great respect for military heroism and military sacrifice. And although many Vietnam veterans were offended by being called “baby killers” and the like by leftist demonstrators in the United States, the general feeling in the White population remained that men in military “service” deserved the support of everyone on the home front. There still was the feeling that America’s armed forces were “defending America.”

Now we have a quite different situation, even though the yahoos won’t realize that for a while yet. In Madeleine Albright’s war against Serbia there’s not even a pretense that America’s armed forces are “defending America” or performing some sort of “service” for the American people which deserves moral support from the home front. The politicians may still mouth hypocritical slogans about “supporting our boys” in order to keep the votes of the yahoos, but no one with a brain takes such slogans seriously any longer. It is clear that America’s armed forces have become a purely mercenary operation. Joining the armed forces these days is an equal-opportunity employment choice, not a patriotic act. Soldiers are paid to enforce the will of the New World Order crowd, not to defend the American people, and they deserve no more support or respect from civilians than the members of any other occupational group: bus drivers or construction workers, say. If an F-117 is shot down, its replacement cost comes out of our tax dollars, but that’s also true of the government’s spending for highway maintenance or new prisons. There just isn’t any emotional dimension to it.

And when it comes to a conflict between American military personnel fighting under NATO or United Nations command on one side and Serbian military personnel on the other side, there no longer is a moral obligation to cheer for the Americans. They are not defending us; we don’t have to support them. They’re not even on “our” side any more than the Serbs are. And at least the Serbs have an all-White army.

As I said, this is really a big and important change in the nature of things. The Jews always were impatient with our old-fashioned sense of patriotism. It gave them a handle for manipulating us, but they always were a little afraid of it, always a little worried that it might turn against them someday. So now they’ve changed the equation of patriotism. Now they’ve dropped the pretense. That’s one more step in the remaking of America in the Jewish image, and judging from what some of the more reckless Jews have been saying recently, they feel pretty good about it. At least, they don’t have to apologize any longer for the sort of statistics I just cited on Vietnam casualties. Now they can simply cite their success in evading service as proof that they’re smarter than we are.

My view of the matter is that they have moved a little prematurely on this and eventually will come to regret it bitterly. Based in instinct as it is, patriotism cannot be gotten rid of so easily. They have succeeded in invalidating the moral contract which used to exist between America’s soldiers and her civilians, just as they invalidated the concept of popular democracy when they put together a majority coalition of welfare rabble, non-Whites, homosexuals, feminists, and ball-game fans under their control which could elect something like Bill Clinton to the White House twice in a row, even though everything about the man offended decent and responsible Americans.

You know, not everyone is adaptable enough to accept this new situation. There is a strong conservative tendency in most people which resists change. Just because something like democracy has become institutionalized in our society, they will continue to accept it and respect it even after it has been subverted and turned against them. They will continue to salute the concept of democracy reflexively, even when our deadliest enemies are using that concept to destroy us. When the Jews have put together a coalition of voters they can count on to elect public officials under Jewish control, many decent Americans will simply permit themselves to be voted into slavery or voted into the slaughterhouse rather than abandon the institutionalized and revered concept of democracy.

I believe that the true patriot is one who puts the survival and freedom and progress of his people ahead of any theory of government, institutionalized or not. The true patriot is one who, when confronted with the reality of the Clinton coalition, will not simply bow his head and accept the will of the majority but will plan instead to do whatever is necessary to make the will of the patriotic minority prevail over the Clinton majority. If that means turning that majority into a minority by thinning out some of its components, then so be it. And if it means abandoning the concept of democracy itself, at least temporarily, then so be it.

And, just as many conservatives will let institutionalized democracy destroy our people rather than oppose it, so also will many conservatives not be willing to come to grips with the subversion of America’s armed forces which has taken place. Because respect and support for the armed forces have been institutionalized, any recognition that respect and support no longer are appropriate will be resisted by conservatives. For example, at the end of my broadcast last week I said that decent people everywhere can hope that the Serbs will use one of their submarines to sink a U.S. aircraft carrier in the Adriatic, and I received some shocked and indignant responses to this statement — as I expected I would. One or two listeners suggested I “got carried away” by my hatred for the Clinton government. For these listeners the old taboo is still in effect. We still must “support our boys,” even when they are taking orders from Madeleine Albright.

Well, let me assure you, I never get carried away. I meant what I said — but it was hard for me to say it. I always have had a stronger than average admiration and respect for military traditions and virtues. I always have been very conscious of the moral contract between the armed forces and the civilian population, which is why I was so outraged during the Vietnam war by the behavior of people like Bill Clinton and Jane Fonda. And so I understand that it is very difficult for conservatives to accept what I said.

Nevertheless, let me carry my thoughts on this subject a bit further. The U.S armed forces have been brainwashed and trained for some time now to be used against rebellious U.S. citizens. Don’t worry about the legalities of the matter; they will be used by the Jews and their allies against Americans whenever the Jews feel threatened. They are being used now to kill people who are a lot like us, people whose thinking is a lot healthier, a lot closer to that of the average White American of 50 years ago than to the thinking of the people who voted for Clinton three years ago. They really are a mercenary force, and their leaders would just as soon use them against White Americans or Europeans as against Haitians or Somalis.

More so, in fact. Perhaps you will remember that in my broadcast two weeks ago I quoted for you what General Wesley Clark had told reporters about his own motivation for killing Serbs. General Clark, remember, is the military boss of NATO, the man directing the New World Order’s murderous bombing campaign against Serbia. Clark said, and I quote: “There is no place in modern Europe for ethnically pure states. That’s a 19th-century idea, and we’re trying to transition into the 21st century, and we’re going to do it with multi-ethnic states.” I commented in that same broadcast about the politicization of America’s armed forces, with General Clark as an example of the new breed of political generals, military leaders who mouth the political slogans of the New World Order and are as ready to sacrifice the interests of America in the service of what British Prime Minister Tony Blair calls “the new internationalism” as are Albright, Cohen, Berger, and the rest of the Jewish gang around Clinton.

Well, two weeks ago, I didn’t realize just how close General Clark’s ties to that gang are. I didn’t realize that he is a blood-member of the gang himself. You know, Jews are so scarce in our armed forces that I just assumed that none of our top military leaders are Jews. I just assumed that they are politicians, amoral careerists who will do whatever they are told to do by the Jews around Clinton. But I have just found out that Clark is more than a politician mouthing Jewish slogans in order to advance his career. Clark’s biological father was a Russian Jew named Benjamin Jacob Kanne. Clark’s grandfather had left Russia with the name Jacob Nemerovsky and sneaked into the United States with a forged passport, using the name “Kanne.” Clark’s father died when the boy was five years old, and his mother married a Gentile, Victor Clark. His mother and stepfather raised him as a Christian in Little Rock, Arkansas.

His Jewish blood relatives kept in touch, however, and more than 30 years ago began bringing him into the Jewish network. That was when Clark was at Oxford as a Rhodes scholar, about the same time Clinton was. Rhodes scholarships seem to be almost a membership initiation requirement for the New World Order gang, like certain types of tattoos for prison gangs or the chopping off of part of a finger for the Japanese mafia, the yakuza.

Clark welcomed his new Jewish contacts, and they may have helped him up the political ladder to his present position. Otherwise, it just seems too much of a coincidence. I have a suspicion that when Clark has finished his NATO duties he will have a leading role to play in the military in the United States. He would be the ideal choice for using the Army to politically cleanse the United States, rounding up any remaining patriots and putting them away so that they can never pose a threat to the Clinton coalition.

And really, that’s coming. I don’t know what methods or what pretense they will use. I don’t know what the timetable will be. But I know that it’s coming. That’s what the New World Order gang has spent 50 years getting our armed forces ready for. That’s what General Wesley Kanne Clark is being groomed for.

You know, despite what you might think from listening to the politicians in Washington, despite what you might think from looking at what our armed forces have become, despite everything the Jews have done to brainwash Americans, there still are a great many patriots left here. The patriotic instinct is still here, waiting for a new way to express itself. But if it is to express itself effectively — if patriots are to prevail over those who believe that only multi-ethnic states should be permitted to exist in the 21st century — then one of the first things we must do is understand clearly that the old contract between soldiers and civilians is broken. We must understand that the people now killing Serbs in our name, the people who later will be used in an effort to kill us — these military people are no longer “our boys.”

Additional Reading

Stolen Valor, B.G. Burkett and Glenna Whitley (Verity Press, 1998)

* * *

Source: American Dissident Voices broadcast, May 1999

For Further Reading

Previous post

Not Bush, Not Cheney: It Was Jews Who Wanted War With Iraq

Next post

Another American Triumph

No Comments Yet

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Slander, crude language, incivility, off-topic drift, or remarks that might harm National Vanguard or its users may be edited or deleted, even if unintentional. Comments may be edited for clarity or usage.