AIDS and the Cult of Equality
by Dr. William L. Pierce
THE ORGANIZATION which I head, the National Alliance, has for the past five years or so been publishing warnings about the dangers of contracting AIDS through sexual contact with non-Whites. We have warned, for example, that heterosexual Black males are 14 times as likely as heterosexual White males of being carriers of HIV, the AIDS-causing virus. Our data came from the U.S. government’s Centers for Disease Control and were entirely accurate at the time. Of course, we were lambasted by the Jewish media and by a great many Politically Correct White people as well — “racially sensitive” Gentiles who take their lead from the Jewish media — for providing these warnings. We were denounced as “haters,” and horror was expressed that we would publish such information.
Some of these Politically Correct Whites are so steeped in the lie of equality that they don’t believe such a startling difference between the races could exist. After all, they have been told all their lives by the public schools and the government and the controlled media that Blacks and Whites are just alike except for skin color. So how could Black men be 14 times as likely as White men to transmit AIDS to a sexual partner? I mean, I receive hand-wringing letters literally every day from anguished egalitarians who whine to me that “we are all the same inside, Black and White. We all bleed red.” Well, of course, snakes and rats bleed red too. But there are differences.
Other White people who like to think of themselves as “racially sensitive” understand that this enormous racial disparity in HIV infection rates is real — they do not believe that the Centers for Disease Control is faking the data — but they believe that it is “racist” to mention it. They deplore anything which might offend Blacks by reminding them of racial differences or — even worse — which might reduce the incidence of interracial sex. Better for White women to die from AIDS, they believe, than to avoid sex with Black men.
Well, just last week new AIDS data were published based on a study of 1.7 million blood donors in the United States. Each donor was tested for the presence of HIV using a new method which distinguishes between recent infections by the virus and infections which have been in the donor’s blood for more than a few months. The study revealed a new infection rate among Blacks which is more than 25 times the new infection rate for Whites. I’ll repeat that: the per capita number of new HIV infections among Blacks is between 25 and 26 times the number for Whites, indicating that the disparity between Blacks and Whites in the infection rate is increasing rapidly. While five years ago heterosexual Black males were 14 times more likely to be HIV carriers than Whites, the latest figures for new infections indicate that that ratio now is somewhere between 14 and 25: probably around 20.
AIDS began as a Black disease in Africa; it spread to White homosexuals through sexual contact with Blacks, and for a few years White homosexuals made up the principal reservoir for AIDS outside of Africa; now, among heterosexuals, AIDS is on the way to becoming an almost exclusively Black disease again. In addition to the obvious behavioral reasons for this, there also are more direct genetic reasons: Blacks are genetically predisposed to infection by the AIDS-causing virus. This is an inherited, racial difference.
The main reason why AIDS remains a concern for White Americans is that heterosexual Whites can and do become infected by the virus, even if not as easily as Blacks do, and when we are infected the virus is just as lethal for us. There was a time when the main infection channels for Whites were intravenous drug usage and bisexual White males, who spread the disease from their homosexual male partners to their heterosexual female partners. These days the greatly increased incidence of interracial sex, primarily between Black males and White women, is the principal channel the disease has into the heterosexual White population. Were it not for this interracial sex, we might be able to look forward to seeing the disease confined almost entirely to Blacks and homosexuals.
It might seem no real loss to us if White women who have sex with Blacks are lumped in with Blacks and homosexuals as part of the AIDS reservoir; certainly, we can do without them. Unfortunately, however, these trendy/trashy White women also have sex with White men. And the media bosses are doing everything they can to push the trend toward even more interracial sex by producing more racially mixed television entertainment and advertising. Mainly because of this, it looks like AIDS will continue to be a threat to normal White men and women even as it becomes more and more a Black disease.
The most interesting aspect of this to me is the continuing refusal of a large segment of the White public to recognize the racial aspects of the AIDS epidemic. Even people who’re not zealots for Political Correctness are embarrassed by any discussion of the subject. To warn White women that sexual contact with a Black male these days is about 20 times as likely to result in an HIV infection as contact with a White male seems very offensive to these overly sensitive souls. To them it’s like yelling “nigger” in public. It’s just so embarrassing that they can’t deal with it.
You know, I’m as much in favor of politeness and decorum in race relations as anyone. I’ve never been in favor of being gratuitously offensive. But I’ve also never been in favor of sticking my head in the sand or refusing to deal with relevant facts: especially facts relevant to the ever-growing and ever-more-threatening racial problem in America. On these broadcasts I’ve talked about the much greater tendency of Blacks toward criminal behavior. I’ve talked about the prison statistics and the murder statistics and the armed robbery statistics and the rape statistics. These statistics come from the U.S. Department of Justice and the Census Bureau and the FBI, and they show really radical differences in Black and White behavior. These behavioral differences are based on race, on genes — not on income. One can see this radical difference in criminal behavior between Blacks and Whites in the same income brackets. And these crime statistics, just like the AIDS statistics, are relevant. White people need to be aware of these racial differences. Actually, it wouldn’t hurt Blacks to be aware of them too. Anyway, I don’t talk about crime statistics in order to offend anyone or to hurt anyone’s feelings. Yet whenever I do talk about them, I receive the same whining letters from White idiots who ask me why I can’t understand that “we’re all the same inside.”
And it’s the same when I talk about IQ differences between the races. These racial intelligence differences are large, they are real, and they are relevant. Our schools are in the mess they are in today largely because we ignore these racial differences in intelligence, these differences in problem-solving ability. It embarrasses otherwise intelligent White people to talk about them. They don’t want to be reminded of them. And so they ignore them and pretend that they don’t exist. And they hate me when I won’t let these relevant truths be ignored; they hate me when I rub their noses in the truth.
My organization, the National Alliance, publishes material on racial demographics. For several years we’ve distributed stickers which have the words on them in large print, “Earth’s most endangered species: the White race — help preserve it.” Millions of those stickers have been stuck on fences or power poles or tacked to bulletin boards all over America.
You may have seen one. If you haven’t, send me a self-addressed, stamped envelope, and I’ll send you a free sample. And of course, that sticker, just like everything else we publish, is based on hard facts. It’s based on the fact that White Americans are fast becoming a minority in their own country, just as people of European race already are a minority in the world and are becoming a smaller minority with each passing year. In 1950 the population of the United States was 90 per cent White. Today it’s just over 70 per cent White, and Bill Clinton has been boasting to his supporters that Whites will be a minority in the United States within the next few decades. In the world the White population already is down close to 10 per cent — and that’s because Whites, with their medical science and their agricultural science, have reduced the death rate in the non-White areas of the world and caused the populations there to explode during the 20th century.
Anyway, the message on our sticker is about as innocuous and inoffensive as a message can be. Not a word about Blacks on the sticker, not a word about hurting anyone or about anyone being superior or inferior to anyone else. Yet that simple message — “help preserve the White race” — brings us more hate mail than anything else we publish. And I mean hate mail from White people, who really become uptight when they see our stickers.
Of course, I don’t mean that all White people become uptight when they see our publications or hear my message. Actually, our favorable mail — letters from people who tell us how pleased they were to see one of our stickers or to hear one of my broadcasts, people who tell me how much they agree with my message: our love mail — is running more than three to one over our hate mail. But that may be simply due to the fact that the people who like what I have to say are a more literate bunch than the haters; they are better able to cope with the task of writing a letter.
I say that because I’m aware of Bill Clinton’s popularity polls, and I know that anyone who likes Bill Clinton must hate what I say. Of course, I know that much of Bill Clinton’s constituency isn’t White. The Democrats have put together a coalition of non-Whites and seriously defective Whites — homosexuals, feminists, welfare recipients, and so on: people who have a grievance against society and think they’re entitled to special treatment — and this coalition makes up a majority of the Clinton constituency. And I’m not talking to these people. I don’t care what they think. The only people in the Clinton constituency I care about are the more or less normal, productive White people.
I say more or less normal, because it’s difficult for me to regard anyone who supports Bill Clinton as being entirely normal. I think these people need to have their heads worked on — seriously. I think that if we could understand what’s wrong with these White Clinton supporters we could understand what makes people send me hate letters when I publish AIDS statistics or race-and-crime statistics or other facts which are contrary to what they’ve been told by their television.
At first I thought that these people were afraid that the material I publish might offend Blacks and might provoke a riot and that was why they objected to it. Of course, I wouldn’t be offended if a Black organization published statistics, for example, proving that White people are much more likely to get skin cancer from exposure to the sun than Blacks are. It wouldn’t bother me a bit. For one thing, I know that it’s true. For another thing, I believe that it’s good for White people to be reminded of that: it might make them a little more careful not to get sunburned. And if the Blacks want to believe that their relative immunity to sun-induced skin cancer makes them a superior race, well that’s all right with me too. I’m not offended.
But really, I think that the White people who get upset with me when I say that we ought to preserve the White race aren’t worried that this will hurt the feelings of Blacks. They aren’t worried about being offensive to Blacks. It is they who are offended, because it is an assault on their religion. One of the things that led me to this conclusion was my noticing that the people who send me hate letters have a tendency to say very similar things, as if they’re quoting from scripture. I’ve already mentioned one of the scriptural quotes I often hear from these people: “we’re all the same inside,” which is just another way of saying that the only difference between the races is skin color. And then there’s the reminder that we all bleed red. I guess I’ve heard that a thousand times. And it’s such a stupid thing to say, that they must be quoting scripture. It’s like saying that people have white bones, and rattlesnakes have white bones, therefore there’s really no difference between people and rattlesnakes. When they say, “We all bleed red,” that’s supposed to end the argument. It’s like they believe they have said something very profound.
And there are other really stupid things they all have in their litany. For example, I’ve heard them say at least a thousand times, “There’s no such thing as a White race. There’s only the human race.” And if you meet one of these idiots face to face, he’ll prove to you that there’s no such thing as a White race. He’ll put his hand down on a sheet of white paper and triumphantly point out that his skin tone — and mine — aren’t really white, like the paper. End of argument.
You know, I called these people idiots because they say such stupid things. But really, most of them are not idiots. Most of them can figure out how to operate their VCRs, and some of them can even fill out their own income tax forms, which is more than I can do. They all say the same stupid things because these things come from a catechism. They are statements of religious orthodoxy. They don’t really believe that when I say, “I am a White man,” they can refute me by showing me that my skin tone is not the same as a sheet of white paper. They only believe that in their make-believe world of egalitarianism. And the reason they become angry when they see my stickers about preserving the White race is that I am challenging their religion, which tells them that there is no White race. I am telling them that what they believe isn’t real; it’s only make-believe. And that makes them angry. It makes them hateful. That’s why they write me hate letters which are full of angst and passion and venom, instead of just ignoring me or laughing at me as a benighted infidel. They feel threatened. At some level of their consciousness they understand that their religion is just make-believe. They can be Religiously Correct — they can be pious — when they are with other egalitarians. But in the presence of a heretic they feel threatened, because, as I said, at some level they understand that their Religious Correctness is only make-believe. It cannot stand up to examination in the real world. It will collapse like a house of cards. That’s why they hate any dissident, any heretic.
I’ll say it again: when I see a lot of otherwise intelligent people saying the same stupid things as if they were reciting scripture or reading from a catechism, and when they respond with angst and hatred when contradicted, then I suspect that I am dealing with the members of a religious cult — and in this case it’s the cult of egalitarianism. These are people for whom the statement that there is no difference between Whites and Blacks except skin color is not a scientific statement: it’s a religious statement. They’re horrified when I advise White women that sexual contact with a Black male is about 20 times as likely to give them AIDS as is sex with a White male, not because they believe that I’m saying something which is scientifically incorrect, but because I’m saying something Religiously Incorrect; I am saying something heretical, which threatens their whole belief structure. They are responding to me in the same emotional way that a devout Christian in the 15th century might have responded to someone who announced publicly that he didn’t believe in the virgin birth. And in fact, the people that I offend by stating truths which contradict their egalitarian beliefs, just like their 15th-century Christian counterparts, would like to see me burned at the stake.
You know, this business of making a religion out of egalitarianism isn’t just a curious psychological phenomenon, suitable only for investigation by students of abnormal psychology: it’s an extraordinarily dangerous phenomenon that every patriot — and in fact, every rational person — ought to be very concerned about. In the first place, the prophets and the priests and the bishops of the cult of egalitarianism have at their disposal the most powerful machinery of persuasion and mind control which has ever existed: they are the masters of Hollywood and Madison avenue, of television and films, of all of the most influential newspapers and news magazines. Using their machinery of mind control, they have persuaded the most impressionable segments of our people that certain concepts are sacred and undebatable: concepts such as democracy, equality, diversity, multiculturalism. These are holy concepts, which must never be questioned by cult members. And other concepts are undebatably evil: racism, patriotism, sexism, homophobia, anti-Semitism — ah, yes, above all else, anti-Semitism must be opposed by the cult members.
The cult has appeared under different guises at different times and places. Sometimes it has been called communism, sometimes democracy, but the underlying idea always has been equality, and the prophets and bishops always have been the same people — that is, people from the same tribe, the tribe of Karl Marx and Michael Eisner and Steven Spielberg. And they have preached their poison, their hatred for heretics, for all who questioned their doctrine of equality. They have murdered more people in the name of equality than have been killed for the sake of any other religion. As the great Russian patriot Alexander Solzhenitsyn noted just a few months ago, two generations of the best of his people were selectively murdered in the name of equality — everyone who excelled, everyone who stood out from the crowd, everyone whose excellence showed up the lie of human equality, was murdered by the egalitarians who had a deathgrip on Russia. And really, if they could, they’d do the same thing in America.
That is something to remember every time you hear a cult member whine that “we’re all the same inside.” It’s something to remember when the simple warning that contact with Blacks is the way most White women are becoming infected with the AIDS virus elicits the sneering response from a cult member that “their blood is just as red as yours.” These cult members really don’t care how many White women catch AIDS from Blacks or how many White people are the victims of Black criminals. Their only concern is that people not be reminded of these things.
* * *
Source: Free Speech magazine, February 1999, Volume V, Number 2