← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Solid
Thread ID: 15168 | Posts: 10 | Started: 2004-09-30
2004-09-30 21:05 | User Profile
No matter where I look, the mass media or the internet, or the real world in front of my very eyes, I see the US and white culture in general being overwhelmed by invaders and leeches. Non of this is new to anyone here and I'm sure many have experienced harsh treatment by non whites like I have in my life. I often wonder why we let this happen and why nothing is done about it. I know that in order for something to be done a revolution(or perhaps a revelation) of some sort must happen. But the methods are not something we always agree upon. David Duke for example, wants non violent methods to solve the issues. Normally this something I would agree upon but can reason prevail against those who rarely act human? I wonder then, how likely is a more hostile revolution necessary? I'm starting to believe that is what will be needed to take back our country.
2004-09-30 21:32 | User Profile
You can look at Africa, at places like Zimbabwe or the once majority-white South Africa. Whites refuse to have a revolution, no matter how dark things get. In America and the European nations, I see not the smallest hint that a revolution will ever occur.
I know there are some here who don't like this view. They think it's pessimistic and self-defeating. But, I think it's realistic and I don't see being unrealistic as being practical.
We let it happen because we are mostly comfortable. And, we let it happen because we feel guilty for being being more materially successful.
The only time whites might start fighting back is when there's no longer any majority white place to flee too. By then, white culture will already be ancient history.
2004-09-30 21:33 | User Profile
To answer your question: the reason we let this happen is because White people have become spineless, cringing cowards who break into a sweat and wring their hands at the prospect of being called "racist". They (we) have permitted our society to be dominated by jews whose only allegiance is to israel and themselves. We have found it easier to "go with the flow" and not make waves - that way nobody will call us "racists". When Lyndon Johnson and (the underwater motorist) Teddy Kennedy got their "Immigration And Naturalization Reform Act" pushed through congress, we didn't complain that it limited Whites to only 15% of those accepted into this once great nation. That would have been "racist". We don't rebel when our rights are infringed upon to make blacks and jews happy because that could be seen as "illiberal" and we likewise do not complain when our sons are sent to die defending israel from Iraq - a country that did nothing to us and was no threat.
2004-10-01 03:27 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Happy Hacker]You can look at Africa, at places like Zimbabwe or the once majority-white South Africa. Whites refuse to have a revolution, no matter how dark things get. In America and the European nations, I see not the smallest hint that a revolution will ever occur.
I know there are some here who don't like this view. They think it's pessimistic and self-defeating. But, I think it's realistic and I don't see being unrealistic as being practical.
What you say is true and really puts a damper on things. I didn't even think about South Africa. I admit I really don't know alot about their history but reading what you said makes me want to learn more. I did however once read that when South Africa was started it didn't have many if any blacks living there and they later crossed into the country like the illegal aliens do here. [quote=Happy Hacker] We let it happen because we are mostly comfortable. And, we let it happen because we feel guilty for being being more materially successful.
The only time whites might start fighting back is when there's no longer any majority white place to flee too. By then, white culture will already be ancient history.[/QUOTE]I agree about the first point. The " I got mine so why should I care " attitude is certainly the cause for the apathy of so many folks. But I feel the second one about guilt only exist in the elite faction of society. I rarely see many working class whites cry about the other races not having TVs and PCs.
Opera96, I think the reason why some why shy away at the word of racism and all that is because if a white is accused of being a racist, we could be thrown in jail, ostracized, attacked by hordes of congians and it would be legal. If a black screams out racist even if it's just a knee jerk action, everyone believes him.
When did the the word racist become the synonym for the devil? Actually it's worse to be called a racist than a devil to Libs.
2004-10-01 04:23 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Solid]I did however once read that when South Africa was started it didn't have many if any blacks living there and they later crossed into the country like the illegal aliens do here.
That's right. While the world (and the SA blacks) were whining about how evil Apartheid is, the structure created the quality of country that attracted swarms of black immigrants.
I agree about the first point. The " I got mine so why should I care " attitude is certainly the cause for the apathy of so many folks.
It's more than just apathy. Being an activist for the white race can easily result in you losing what you have, if you have a lot. Thanks to non-stop propaganda from the media and the public schools, most whites really have no ability to appreciate what's going on and their comfortable lives allows them to continue unaware.
But I feel the second one about guilt only exist in the elite faction of society. I rarely see many working class whites cry about the other races not having TVs and PCs.
I don't think whites are worried today about blacks not having TVs. But, they still think that black schools are "underfunded" and they still think that blacks were oppressed 40 years ago.
When did the the word racist become the synonym for the devil? Actually it's worse to be called a racist than a devil to Libs.[/QUOTE]
OJ only killed a couple of white people. Mark Fuhrman used the n-word. Most whites feel rather unemotionally that OJ is guilty, but not evil. Blacks and many whites agree that Fuhrman is evil.
2004-10-01 13:52 | User Profile
Happy Hacker, I don't think South Africa was ever a majority White country. That was part of the problem the jews had with SA, of course: A White minority ruling a black majority. Reeks of colonialism and racism says Schmuely!
Anyway, let me add on here. Take Haiti, Cuba, Domincan Republic, Zimbabwe, South Africa, even Mexico. When non-Whites outnumber Whites, IT'S OVER.
The only problem is there's no where to retreat to anymore. However, I do see a revolution possible, I'm saying only p o s s i b l e, in Europe sometime down the not too distant future. There's been some rumblings over there and I know that lots and lots of people are very upset. As for the USA, forget it, there's no hope. Too many distractions and too much jewish iron fisted control.
The USA is going Third World a la South Africa, Zimbabwe, and Brazil....a remnant and/or somewhat appearance of order and infrastructure, but just underneath the surface, nothing but rot and chaos and stench.
2004-10-01 14:52 | User Profile
Xmetalhead,,,,,,you are sooooooo right.
2004-10-01 17:25 | User Profile
[QUOTE=xmetalhead]Happy Hacker, I don't think South Africa was ever a majority White country. That was part of the problem the jews had with SA, of course: [/QUOTE] X -- I could be mistaken, but I think HH is right. I believe that when the Boers first moved into the area that became SA, they either drove all the black tribes out, or there weren't any in the area to begin with. It was later that blacks came into the territory, and even then they were the minority. Over the past century, however, they far outbred the whites, until the whites were left trying to govern a huge, teeming mass of poor blacks.
2004-10-01 18:12 | User Profile
I can't vouch for the accuracy of my statement. That whites were once a majority in SA is just a factoid in my head and is probably true only for a limited region. But, I do know it to be accurate that SA, under apartheid, had an immigration problem because of the superior quality of life of blacks in South Africa vs. the rest of Africa.
2004-10-01 23:04 | User Profile
Let look to history and remember it is always darkest before the dawn!
[URL=http://www.swp.ie/resources/Ian%20Birchall%20writes%20on%20Russia%201917.htm]"... the Bolshevik Party, emerged as the dominant one. At the beginning of the year it had around 4,000 members... "[/URL]
Fight! Fight! Never stop fighting!