A Training Manual for ‘Racists’
THE NATIONALIST PARTY of Canada has adopted, as a training manual for recruits to our racial cause, an odd book, which, I suspect, libels its officers. In so doing, they evinced, I think, a sound sense of tactics.
The book of 397 pages is entitled Is God a Racist? The Right-Wing in Canada. Its author is Stanley R. Barrett, who is identified as Professor of Sociology and Anthropology [sic!] in the University of Guelph, one of the many ‘quickie’ universities that Canada has been jerry-building in imitation of the American folly of scattering “universities” over the landscape to dilute yet further academic standards, provide jobs for “educational” parasites, demoralize young persons who are thus kept from useful employment, and burden the bovine taxpayers. It is true that some of the mushrooms have already become superior to the ‘old-line’ institutions, but that is merely an index of the intellectual dilapidation of the latter.
The academic institution that Professor Barrett adorns was established in 1964 and already has a body-count of about 11,000. It is located in Guelph, an industrial town sixty-four miles west by south of Toronto. (1) His book was published by the University of Toronto, thus disillusioning those who, remembering that university’s Victoria College, hoped that the older Canadian institutions were less rotted than their counterparts south of the border.
(1. The town was founded in 1827 by John Galt and named in honor of the family of George IV, King of Great Britain and Hanover, a descendant of Count Welf I of Altorf in Swabia. (Guelph is the Italian spelling of the German name.) Galt, of whose many novels The Entail and Lawrie Todd will be remembered by the few who have made an intensive study of English fiction, spent much of his small fortune in an effort to promote the settlement of what was then a wilderness by English and Scots of the best racial stock, and if he were alive today, Barrett would soon flee from the town Galt founded.)
I know nothing of Professor Barrett’s antecedents. He says he was born in a small village, “heavily Protestant,” so it is likely that in his childhood his brain was coagulated with Jesus-juice. The picture of him that I imaginatively derive from his book is that of a man of about thirty who enrolled in one of my graduate classes decades ago. He was a well-meaning and somewhat diffident Aryan, who would have been called a ‘wimp’ in England today. He was industrious and read everything suggested to him, but without the slightest discrimination; he collected information zealously, but did not know, and could not learn, what to do with it. And I particularly recall that during the semester in which he was in my class, he once asked, with shocked incredulity, “Do you mean that there really are people who don’t believe in God?”
Professor Barrett spent five years, industriously gathering for his book information he could not understand, but he evidently reported his factual data without much distortion, for the officers of the Nationalist Party describe his book as “an attempt accurately to portray both the political and human aspects of the 20-year old history of White Nationalism in Canada,” and as “one of the best reference/historical works on White Nationalism published anywhere.”
Professor Barrett claims that he tried to be ‘scientific’ and objective, and I believe that he did try, although he might as well have tried to carry his automobile home on his shoulders. He claims to have undertaken his five years of painful toil from a sense of duty, not, as is usual in “exposés” of the right-wing, for baksheesh from unprincipled publishers. His book, certainly, is not comparable to the Architects of Fear that I described in Liberty Bell, February 1985, a filthy spit-job by a hack who sells his mucus for a buck.
His honesty in admitting his own limitations — which also reminds me of the would-be student I mentioned above — is what makes his book so valuable to every moderately alert reader. He quite candidly begins with a confession that “racism is by definition [sic] pernicious,” and he admits that in dealing with the evil racists he used the guile and perfidy that is permissible to the righteous: “For each of the interviews I conducted, I tried to play a role that I thought would be appropriate for the individual.” And as the sapient anthropologist, turned nark, went sneaking about and practicing his wiles to gain the confidence of men he intended to betray, he doubtless warmed his puny soul with contempt for the obsolete species of Aryans called ‘gentlemen,’ who were so reactionary that they had self-respect and a code of honor that prevented them from practicing proletarian knavery. (2)
(2. This, of course, is the reason why, in military intelligence agencies, before the collapse of our civilization that began with the First World War, commissioned officers could never be sent “into the field,” i.e. to serve abroad as spies, since spies have to resort to dishonorable means of procuring information, and officers were gentlemen. (So far as I know, the Congress of the United States still officially identifies all graduates of West Point and Annapolis as gentlemen; if the assembled congressmen titter as they vote, that is not recorded in the minutes.) Spies, therefore, had to be non-commissioned officers or civilians, i.e., persons who were not bound by the code of honor. This, of course, had nothing to do with the use of civilians in military intelligence in positions in which they might need to overstep or disregard military etiquette and the “chain of command.” Needless to say, the reactionary and hampering concept of personal honor has now been eliminated from a Judaized world.)
Flower-souled Stanley frankly gloats over the hardships, especially poverty, so condignly suffered by evil-thinkers, who do not adore Kikes or cuddle niggers. And he rejoices that “Canada’s most infamous Fascist, Adrien Arcand” was, in violation of law, thrown into a concentration camp by a terrorist despotism. Concentration camps are just fine, so long as they are filled with Aryans and do not inconvenience God’s Own. And it was so nice that a horrid Klansman named Jacklin “was beaten and stabbed by blacks while serving his sentence in a U.S. prison.” Social justice is sweet to tender-hearted humanitarians.
Barrett rejoices over the persecution of that nasty man, Keegstra, who dared to doubt the Jews’ Holohoax, which is so necessary to enable the poor persecuted people, who have made “Israel a bastion of democracy and capitalism,” to exploit and swindle stupid Aryans. He claims to have read the infamous writings of Professors Burt, Jensen, and Coon, whose incompetence or malice has been conclusively exposed by really great scientists, such as Ashley Montagu — but, despite his attempt at objectivity, he fails to tell his reader that Montagu is a Sheeny disguised under an old Anglo-Saxon and an honored Norman name.
I suppose that his reports of his raw data are accurate. One of his principal targets, for example, is Paul Fromm, now the head of Canadians for Foreign Aid Reform, who perversely thinks that Canada should not be made into a great and glorious dunghill of anthropoid refuse, and who lacks the lofty idealism of the Yid whom Canadians have made their Minister of the Interior, who, a few months ago, when another cargo of Tamil-speaking simians from Ceylon was approaching Canada, announced that, regardless of Canadian law, they would be admitted to help the vile Anglo-Saxons “atone for the sin of racism.” By a neat coincidence, only a few days before, the Tamil-speaking Dravidians in India had helped the Hindus atone for their sins by dynamiting a bridge in front of an express train and killing or maiming more than a hundred passengers. Such zealous practitioners of democracy are obviously needed to purify Canada and make it holy.
Now I am sure we may believe Professor Barrett when he tells us that in 1968, Paul Fromm, then a student in St. Michael’s College of the University of Toronto, was elected by a great majority of his fellow students to represent the College in the University’s Student Administrative Council. But, typically, the erudition of the macrocephalic Professor of Anthropology makes it impossible for him to believe that the students could have been so depraved as to approve of Fromm’s dastardly opinions, so he offers us a choice of the only two possible explanations of the election: either the students elected Fromm “because he was a curiosity” or the election was “the undergraduates’ notion of a bad joke.” This one typical example will adequately attest the rigorous objectivity of the sociological “scientist.”
I do not mean to be unkind to Professor Barrett, who underwent a kind of martyrdom for his ideals. He tells us that through the long five years of tracking down evil-thinkers in a great research project that was financed by the Government of Canada, the University of Guelph, and the Social Science Federation of Canada, he was “emotionally exhausted” after each interview, because “never in my life had I talked to people who were committed racists,” and he yearned every day to go out into the streets and apologize to niggers and Kikes for having talked to the awful racists, even though he was magnanimously tricking and deceiving them to ascertain their satanic thoughts. What was more, he was under constant surveillance by Canada’s Thought-Police, who suspected he might be what he pretended to be when he was cozening the racists, and once he was hauled in on suspicion and “put through the hoops” by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. How diligently the cringing Anglo-Saxons of Canada preserve their precious freedoms!
Poor Professor Barrett spent the five years of his martyrdom in a state of acute psychic depression, and he was “chilled” with horror when he encountered a “highly educated man” who actually believed in “the nobility of the white race.” Confronted by so terrible an ogre, tender-souled Stanley did not faint — he may have prudently brought a vial of smelling-salts in his pocket — but exposure to such vileness so sapped his “will-power” that he found it “increasingly difficult to play the roles necessary to conduct interviews with white supremacists” and he became so awkward in his scurvy hypocrisy that some of them suspected he was what he was, a dirty little spy. Although high-minded Stan was sustained by his glowing sense of his own supernal righteousness, he was barely able to complete his godly work. Contact with “racism,” you see, is not only “debilitating,” but actually “soul-destroying” and the sneaking little martyr barely escaped a permanent neurosis.
One must pity long-suffering Professor Barrett, just as every humane man must feel for a neurotic female who, having ordered her life on the faith that old Jesus will give her a hug when her discarnate soul floats up to his Nephelococcygia in the welkin, is forced to listen to an atheist, an ordeal that exposes her to the risk of thinking thoughts that would consign her ghost to eternal perdition. Fortunately, however, although Stanley’s epicene spirit must often have been on the verge of hysteria, it survived, unblemished, the “soul-destroying” contact with real men.
The Nationalist Party of Canada is right in seeing the educational efficacy of a training manual inadvertently supplied by the University of Toronto. It is educational — like picking up a stone and watching what was under it. And we should sincerely thank Professor Barrett for having so frankly and transparently shown us what goes on under the skulls of “Liberal intellectuals.” From his book I cannot determine whether or not he believes all the tales about Jesus ben Yahweh, but, unmistakably, he belongs to the great Christian tradition which teaches Aryans to love everybody so much that they want to rip the guts out of everybody who doesn’t love everybody as much as they do. (3)
(3. Lest I be misunderstood, I must add that I do not mean that Stanley would do any of the ripping himself. I feel confident that his psyche is so sensitive that he abhors violence in which he would have to participate personally, and I am sure he is so kind that he would not venture to slap a child, who might fight back. Great-souled humanitarians always want to see dangerous work done for them.)
Finally, we must thank the University of Toronto for having shown us, however unintentionally, what disgustingly righteous little twerps now squawk and squeal about “racism.”
* * *
Source: Liberty Bell magazine, July 1988