American Dissident Voices Broadcast of March 17, 2001
Hello!
Today let's begin by talking about individualism and individualists. I'm
using those words in a special sense. In this broadcast today when I say
"individualist" I mean a person who habitually fails to consider or to
give proper weight to the group context in which he belongs when
viewing the world, formulating ideas, and reaching decisions; and who in
evaluating other people fails to put them into the group context to
which they belong, instead focusing narrowly only on the individual at
hand.
I also will use the word "individualist" today to designate a person who
makes an ideology out of his individualism. In this sense an
individualist is a person who believes that it is good, moral,
admirable, proper, and so on to disregard group contexts; and immoral,
unpatriotic, reprehensible, and wicked not to do so. Actually it's
impossible to avoid group contexts, and the ideological individualist
himself divides people into two groups: namely, individualists, who,
like himself, are good people; and "collectivists," who, like me, are
bad people, akin to communists.
I've spoken with you in earlier broadcasts about the ideology of
individualism, and today I want to focus more on some of the practical
implications of the attitude. I'll tell you first what prompted my
choice of this subject today: Two weeks ago I said some unkind things
about lawyers, judges, and our judicial system, and in response to that
broadcast I received a couple of indignant letters from lawyers who told
me that I was both unfair and inaccurate in my negative characterization
of lawyers. Not all lawyers are soulless, money-grubbing crooks, they
told me. Some lawyers are decent, honest, patriotic people, they told
me. Some lawyers agree with me about most things, and it is foolish to
alienate them by calling all lawyers crooks. I need their support, and I
will lose it if I continue to insult them.
Well, I can't really disagree with that. I personally know a few lawyers
who aren't crooks, and I certainly do want to retain their support.
Looking at my broadcast of two weeks ago from an individualist
viewpoint, it was both unfair and inaccurate. The individualist would
say that I paint things with too broad a brush. I should say that some
lawyers are crooks, and then the individualist will agree with me. Of
course, the essence of my message two weeks ago was not that some
lawyers are crooks; it was that the judicial system is corrupt. The
system designed by lawyers and staffed by lawyers for the purpose of
making and interpreting the laws is corrupt. The fact that every lawyer
is in some sense a part of that system does not mean that every lawyer
is corrupt. A few lawyers who are in the system are fighting against the
system. I didn't say that two weeks ago, because I wanted to keep my
message simple and direct. I didn't want to distract my listeners from
the main thrust of the message with qualifications and quibbles. It's an
important message, and I wanted it to make the strongest possible
impression on my listeners. I deliberately paint with a broad stroke.
Here's another example of the way in which people looking at things from
an individualist viewpoint misunderstand my message. I am often critical
of the Christian churches, of their subservient collaboration with the
Jews, of their encouragement of miscegenation and their other racially
destructive policies. And some Christians who agree with my positions on
the Jews and on race take offense at my comments regarding the overall
role of Christianity in our society today, and they tell me, "Hey! I'm
offended. All Christians aren't racemixers and collaborators with the
Jews." And of course, I understand that. I understand that there are
many individual Christians who are good people, Christians who don't run
with the Jews, but what I was talking about was the overall role of
Christianity and the Christian churches in our society, and that role
today is destructive.
Another example: I often talk about the feminization of our society and
the feminization of our young men, and I make it quite clear that I
don't approve of these things. This offends some women, who take what I
say quite personally. An expression I used in one broadcast which
offended several of my women listeners enough for them to send me
indignant letters of protest was the phrase "college girls of both
sexes." The implication was that college girls are not to be taken more
seriously than feminized college boys. At another time I stated that
permitting women to vote was a terrible mistake, and again I received
letters from women who indignantly told me that they vote more
responsibly than many men they know. Well, I'm sure they do, but I was
talking about the overall effect of women's votes, and that has been
very damaging to our society.
Of course, women as a rule take everything personally, and so I explain
individually to those who protest that I do take women seriously, that I
value and respect them, and that I love them -- but that I also
understand that despite all of the fascinating individual differences
among them, all of them are profoundly different from men.
When I receive protests from lawyers and from male Christians, however,
I see the individualist fallacy at work. Men should not look at the
world as individualists. They should understand that it is not only
natural and proper but necessary to judge other men according to the
group of which they are a part. Just as people have individual
characteristics, they also have collective characteristics, and to
ignore the latter from fear of being considered a racist or a sexist or
an anti-Semite or a homophobe is the worst sort of folly. When one is in
a war one doesn't judge the soldiers on the other side as individuals.
One doesn't hold one's fire because the fellow in the enemy's uniform
who is charging with a rifle in his hands may really have wanted to be a
conscientious objector instead of a combat infantryman. If he's in the
enemy's uniform, one shoots at him.
We understand, of course, that not all Blacks are muggers or
gang-bangers or armed robbers or HIV-infected rapists, just as we
understand that not every Jew is a predator who is actively scheming to
destroy our people after he has sucked us dry. When I look at a Black I
may see a criminal or a welfare bum, or I may see an honest,
hard-working person, but in either case I see a Black, and I understand
what his race is doing to my race collectively. Even if an individual
Black with whom I am dealing is friendly, intelligent, and moral, I
would be a fool to expect him to join me in a campaign to put an end to
what his race is doing to my race and my civilization collectively.
I sometimes am obliged to deal with Jews: much more often than with
Blacks, in fact, because Jews collectively have arrogated to themselves
so many positions of control and influence in our society. And I am able
to distinguish among individual Jews. I see that many of them I deal
with are tricky and deceitful, but there are some who are
straightforward and sincere, I believe. Many are really hateful, but
occasionally I meet one who is almost likable. Yet I never forget what
Jews collectively, as a whole, are doing and have done to my people
collectively.
We must understand that we are in a planet-wide race-war, and the
survival of our race depends on our winning this war. We won't win by
wasting our time trying to figure out who the friendly Blacks are and
who the hostile ones are. We won't win by refusing to talk about what
the Jewish media bosses and the powerful Jewish organizations are doing
to our people from fear that we may be unjustly casting suspicion on
Jews who are simply minding their own business. We must deal with them
collectively, and when the crunch comes that's certainly the way they
will deal with us.
In fact, that's pretty much the way they already deal with us. When
those gangs of Blacks were running wild through the Mardi Gras crowd in
Seattle a couple of weeks ago, savagely attacking White people, they
didn't try to figure out which Whites were racists and which ones were
diversity-loving, race-mixing liberals. Their cry was, "Let's get a
Whitey! We gonna kick some White ass tonight," and they attacked any
White target of opportunity they encountered.
Speaking of the Fat Tuesday race riot in Seattle which the national
media have so successfully kept most of the country from hearing about,
I have a few more thoughts to share with you on the subject. For one
thing, I've been able to gather a little more information about what
happened that night. Not only was there a series of vicious beatings and
robberies of White men and women by gangs of rampaging Blacks, there
also was a series of sexual assaults. The controlled media were even
more eager to keep these covered up than the beatings and robberies, but
the news is leaking out -- in Seattle, at least.
It was very similar to what happened in New York's Central Park last
year, when a gang of Blacks and Puerto Ricans grabbed White women who
were walking in the park, ripped their clothes off, squeezed their
breasts, pushed fingers into their vaginas, and otherwise abused and
humiliated them. Just as in New York, in Seattle it was very definitely
racial, often with both Black males and Black females collaborating in
the sexual abuse of White women, and it was very definitely hostile: the
same Black gangs who were sexually abusing White women were viciously
beating White women and White men. When it happened in Central Park the
news got out - -primarily, I think, because a couple of very loud Jewish
feminists were among those abused. In Seattle it's been covered up. But
now it is coming out, after a fashion. I'll read just one line from a
March 12 article in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer about just one woman
who was being held down and abused on Fat Tuesday while a news reporter
filmed the scene: -- quote -- "At one point there are 19 hands -- black,
Asian, Hispanic -- on her body." -- end quote --
Now I want to talk with you more about something I touched on at the
beginning of last week's broadcast, and that's the behavior of the White
people in Seattle's Mardi Gras crowd both before and during the riot. I
should begin by saying that it wasn't the way the local media and the
Seattle police claimed it was, with hooligans of both races fighting it
out. Whites did not attack Blacks. It was entirely Blacks attacking
Whites. I have had a chance now to study videotape footage of the riot,
and the one-sided nature of the racial attacks is quite clear.
What also is quite clear, however, is that many Whites in the crowd were
acting like Blacks, and virtually all of the Whites were acting like
lemmings. First, the Whites acting like Blacks: "wiggers" they are
generally called, for an obvious reason. There were many young White men
in the crowd wearing the backward baseball caps and baggy shorts which
are the trademark uniform of the wigger. Pathetic souls that they are,
they have been robbed of any natural sense of racial identity and racial
community by this utterly sick and depraved society in which we live.
And I mean deliberately robbed, with malice aforethought.
The Jewish media -- and the public schools -- have played especially
reprehensible roles in this destructive, genocidal work. Everything
which in healthier times helped give our young people a sense of
collective racial identity and racial pride has been kept from them
deliberately in the schools. The teaching of history and literature has
become a joke. The Jews and the feminists and the egalitarians have
ripped the guts out of everything in the schools which used to have
White racial content. The multiculturalist ideologues think this is
wonderful because it prepares our children to be world citizens in the
New World Order of multiculturalism and diversity. For the
multiculturalists it's a religion. But the conservative Republicans who
have made an ideology out of individualism think it's fine too: at
least, it's not collectivism; it's not racism.
But having a sense of collective identity, a sense of who we are and
what group we belong to is what is natural. We evolved with a need for
this sense of collective identity. That's the way we survived in the
past. And so when the schools and the media rob the more lemminglike
kids of their sense of identity, they look for a replacement. And the
schools -- and especially the Jewish media -- have a readymade
replacement for them. They find it on Sumner Redstone's MTV. They find
it in Black History Month, where they are told that everyone of worth,
from the ancient Egyptian pharaohs to the inventors of the helicopter
and television, were Blacks. They find it in the glorification by the
media of Black basketball players and other Black sports figures. They
find it in the almost inescapable presence of Black music promoted by
the media. And they are made to understand that if they wear a
Confederate flag patch on their shirts they'll be expelled from school.
But it's OK to wear a Malcolm X T-shirt to commemorate a Black hero who
wrote about how much he wanted to kill Whites. And so we have wiggers
imitating Blacks in clothing styles, in speech patterns, in musical
taste, and in behavior. That's why when we look at the video footage of
Seattle's Fat Tuesday riot we can see young White men acting like
Blacks, smashing windows, vandalizing cars, sometimes fighting with
normal Whites, pawing girls, and behaving in a generally animalistic
way.
Then there are the rest of the Whites, the approximately normal Whites.
Two things are notable about them. First, they weren't expecting the
Blacks to misbehave; they were completely surprised when the Blacks
began attacking them. And second, they didn't fight back. With the
notable exception of 20-year-old Kris Kime, who was murdered by the
Blacks for behaving the way a White man should behave, they didn't even
try to protect their own women. They just stood around and gaped at what
was happening. To me these two things are far more disturbing than what
the Blacks did.
So why were the more or less normal Whites surprised when the Blacks
began behaving like Blacks? Why weren't they expecting that? Haven't we
had enough experience with Black behavior in America yet?
And, of course, the answer to that is that the normal Whites are just as
much lemmings as the wiggers. The wiggers just show it in a more
degenerate fashion. The wiggers are usually the lower-IQ lemmings -- the
lower-class, more impressionable lemmings. But the normal lemmings, most
of them less than 30 years old, have been conditioned all their lives,
just like the wiggers, by the Jewish media, by the schools, by the
government, and by the Christian churches to believe that Blacks are the
same as Whites, except a little darker. Really, most young Americans
believe that, and they're surprised every time reality conflicts with
their belief. Every day I receive letters from distressed young lemmings
who have heard one of my broadcasts or visited my Web site. They whine
at me, "Why can't you see that we're all the same? Don't you understand
that the only difference between us and Blacks is skin color? Don't you
know that the only race is the human race? The scientists have proved
it!"
And really, they all sound pretty much alike. They have had these lies
drilled into their heads, and they parrot them back at me. And some of
these lemmings are reasonably bright, educated people. They really
believe that scientists have proved that there is no difference between
Blacks and Whites. And, I am sorry to say, some scientists have
contributed to this false belief, either because they are lemmings
themselves and want to show that they are Politically Correct, or
because they hope to improve their chances of getting another government
research grant. Some of the scientists associated with the human genome
project, for example, have been quoted by the media as saying that the
mapping of the human genome supports the notion that racial differences
are insignificant. There is only a fraction of a percent difference
between the genomes for Whites and for Blacks they say. The genomes for
the various races are far more similar than they are different.
What they don't say, of course, is that there is only a fraction of a
per cent difference between the genome for White people and that for
chimpanzees. In fact, there is only a very small percentage difference
among the genomes for all the species of mammals. Most of the mammalian
genome, whether it is for a White person or a rat or a Negro or a dog,
contains instructions for how to synthesize hair and skin and nails and
bone and milk and teeth and nerve tissue and so on. Nearly all of the
mammalian genome is taken up with these instructions which are pretty
much the same for all mammals. Only a tiny fraction of the mammalian
genome is different for each species. But that tiny fraction of the
mammalian genome that specifies whether the hair and skin and bone and
other tissues will become a White person or a rat or a Negro or a dog is
important. The differences, small though they may seem compared to the
similarities, are significant. Except to lemmings, of course, who
really don't get it.
White women baring their breasts in the presence of Black males is an
indication of just how lemminglike the normal Whites are. Even back in
Christian times, when the Mardi Gras festival was a much more
significant thing than it is today, there was a sexual flavor to much of
the revelry. But if a woman bared her breasts in a village Mardi Gras
festival in those times, 200 or 300 years ago, say, there were only
Whites present, only members of her own tribe, her own racial family,
and she could reasonably expect that she would not be sexually
assaulted. There's an enormous difference between that and exposing
herself to non-Whites. But lemmings have been conditioned not to
understand that. And so they really were surprised when the Blacks in
the crowd began behaving like Blacks.
It is not only the lie that we are all the same, that there are no
significant differences between us and Blacks, that made the Whites in
Seattle such easy victims for the Blacks. It also is the abominable
doctrine of the ideological individualists that it is immoral to judge
people collectively, the racially destructive doctrine that it is
immoral to deal with rioting Blacks collectively. The individualists
have preached that we should look only at individuals committing crimes
against other individuals, and we should shut our eyes to the fact of
Blacks committing crimes collectively against Whites. The individualists
have preached that for Whites even to notice what Blacks collectively
are doing to Whites collectively, whether in a Mardi Gras festival or in
our public schools or anywhere else is wicked; it is racist. It is
wicked to notice what the collective Black presence in our society is
doing to our society, to our civilization. We must judge each Black
individually; we must not organize a White posse and begin cracking
Black skulls when we see Backs collectively rampaging against our fellow
Whites, the way they did in Seattle.
These are poisonous doctrines, racially destructive doctrines, both the
doctrine of sameness and the doctrine of individualism. Of course,
there's more to it: there is the general softness, the generally
feminized condition, of young White males these days. And there was the
presence of the wiggers in the crowd, blurring the distinction between
Whites and Blacks. Altogether, as a race we are in pretty sorry shape
these days. It's really dangerous, and we need to do something about it.
Get in touch with me, and I'll tell you what you and I together can do.
Thanks for being with me again today.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
The text above is based on a broadcast of the American Dissident
Voices radio program sponsored by National Vanguard Books.
It is distributed by e-mail each Saturday to subscribers of ADVlist.
To subscribe to ADVlist send an e-mail message to:
ADVlist-on@NatVan.com (The subject and body of the message don't
matter.)
For more information about National Vanguard Books or the
National Alliance see our web site at http://www.natvan.com or
http://www.natall.com.
==> The National Alliance has a strict anti-spamming policy. This
information is intended for interested parties only and is not to be
indiscriminately distributed via mass e-mailing or newsgroup posting.
To contact us, write to:
National Vanguard Books
Attention: ADVlist
P.O. Box 330
Hillsboro, WV 24946
or e-mail: national@NatVan.com please tell us if we can post your
comments and if so whether you want your name or e-mail address
given.
--> TO BE REMOVED from ADVlist, send an e-mail message to:
ADVlist-off@NatVan.com (The subject and body of the message don't
matter.)
(c) 2001 National Vanguard Books
.
Back to Martin Lindstedt's Christian Israelite Church&State WWW Page.
Back to Patrick Henry On-Line
Back to The Thought 4 The Day
Back to Stuff I Wish I Wrote -- But Didn't
.