← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Hugh Lincoln
Thread ID: 6295 | Posts: 19 | Started: 2003-04-23
2003-04-23 15:04 | User Profile
Michael Hart (I believe a Jew) wrote an essay that appeared in Jared Taylor's The Real American Dilemma and called for racial separatism along these lines: A White nation, a black nation, and a "mixed" nation for those who want neither part of the two former. Geography was not specified. In Civil War II, Tom Chittum predicts three nations: A White in the north, a black in the Southeast, and a Hispanic in the Southwest.
Neither Hart nor Chittum address Jews.
And, Sam Francis squared off with Rabbi Schiller on the issue, with Francis arguing against racial separation and Schiller (I understand) for. Francis said it's an unworkable plan, more or less, and that we should focus on "retaking" America itself.
I solicit OD'ers thoughts on these ideas.
2003-04-23 18:08 | User Profile
It seems to me that 'retaking America' is the unrealistic option. It implies that we whites will either rule or exclusively occupy the current territory of the United States to the extent that we can live completely on our own terms. At best the implication is a return to the days of a multi-racial state, ruled by whites; at worst it means that we must be the victors in an all-out race war. It also means that whites must somehow achieve near-unanimity of opinion, sufficient to either win an all-out race war, or to sustain a racially dominant position over generations.
Division of the territory into several racially-based nations either by agreement, through conflict, or by a combination of these is a more likely outcome. Additionally, I believe separation is the option favored by most white nationalists. Most probably would favor the least extreme solution, particularly since so many are concerned with our fragile demographics.
2003-04-23 18:28 | User Profile
Originally posted by Uncle John@Apr 23 2003, 18:08 ** Division of the territory into several racially-based nations either by agreement, through conflict, or by a combination of these is a more likely outcome. **
I agreee. It's already happening in some places and an Aussie journalist once called it an "unofficial race war."
Organic communities will make a comeback when the police/legal system that supports the current diversity-fascist state falls apart. That's already happening too. Cutbacks in police and fire services have been going on about a year now with no end in sight. You cannot sluice billions of bucks into fighting Israel's wars and have enough left over for a national infrastructure. Not with the economy going in the tank.
Black nationalists, the ones I've known, have been the most clear-headed on this issue. They've always thought of the whole "integration" movement as an indulgence. When the money runs out it'll be back to synarchy. They are probably right.
The most effective strategy is to be sure our group has a strong enough warlord to hold some good property. With Bush we wouldn't even get Rhode Island.
2003-04-23 18:44 | User Profile
White separatism happens every day, in the form it can happen given the circumstances -- white flight and bunching up. Even liberals participate in it. The problem is that whites have to flee further and furhter, and their new communities aren't immune to being overrun with Hispanics and blacks.
2003-04-23 19:09 | User Profile
Originally posted by Uncle John@Apr 23 2003, 12:08 ** It seems to me that 'retaking America' is the unrealistic option. **
I think this is correct. By now, Francis' vision of White control of America would simply not be acceptable to blacks, Hispanics or anyone else (I am paraphrasing his response). Imagine trying to "sell" or even sneak that one past the millions. For the path of least resistance, separatism is the way to go.
Anyone have thoughts on the practical details? Would the areas in question be geographically contiguous? Would it be practical to appoint a committee to oversee it, even a multiracial one? I could see THAT getting damn ugly, with endless bickering over who gets what.
Also, anyone know of strong writings in support of the idea besides the ones I've cited?
2003-04-24 14:19 | User Profile
**AntiYuppie wrote:
I believe that the right path to take is one in which self-aware whites infiltrate the major institutions of power and gradually disenfranchise Jews and coloreds from whatever priveleges and clout they enjoy.**
I don't see how this is possible when the system is designed to exclude whites, particularly white males. Furthermore, the 'long march' of the jews took about 80 years, and I don't think we have that much time.
2003-04-24 18:29 | User Profile
Originally posted by AntiYuppie@Apr 23 2003, 14:37 ** I believe that the right path to take is one in which self-aware whites infiltrate the major institutions of power and gradually disenfranchise Jews and coloreds from whatever priveleges and clout they enjoy. After all, the Jewish elite in America came to enjoy its power without firing a single shot, at least not at Americans. **
AY might be right about the advantage of re-infiltration. And he's certainly right about Jewish takeover happening without a single shot.
Here are response thoughts.
Even if Whites accomplish the daunting dask of re-taking institutional control of the United States, there would still be the fact of physical co-existence with non-Whites. I have had the thought that this might not be too bad, as I imagine that once upon a time, blackie wasn't so quick to rape a White woman or rob a White man because he knew there was a whip or a rope waiting for him. Even if we could protect our people from physical harm, the nigras and Hispanics would still be a problem because there are tons more of them today. Short of mowing them all down with machine gun fire, I don't know how our peace and safety could be secured with them occupying the same space. I wonder if the time for re-infiltration hasn't passed. It might have worked in the 1950s or 1960s, when all we had to deal with were American Negroes and a handful of Indians. Today, our nation is overrun with immigrants both legal and not from everywhere on Earth. In short, even if we could do it, I don't know if it would be desirable.
Jews accomplished what they accomplished because they have far less regard for truth and honesty than Whites do. We might be congenitally unable to do to them what they've done to us. Also, if there is one group sure to put a stop to re-infiltration, it is Jews. But, I toss it back to OD'ers on which would be stronger: Jewish resistance to re-infiltration or separatism.
I just want that world back where magazines had pictures of White people and little girls in pinafore dresses could walk safely down the street. Is this an impossible task?
2003-04-25 09:36 | User Profile
Nothing spoken of here is by definition 'unattainable', if for no other reason than we once had it. Thus, it can be had.
All it requires is we do, here, the sort of thing the Jews are having us do in the Middle East. Regime change, by force of arms.
You can have anything you want - for a price. But people tend to blanch when you point that out. It's barbaric...it's uncivilized...you can't say that- don't you know they're watching?
But you will not otherwise restore the Republic at the ballot box. You will not revive the spirit of 1776 among a thoroughly atomized populace via the eloquence of your arguments or the erudition of your footnotes. You will not be given any "equal time", nor any platform you do not seize yourselves. You will not forge new patriots while you temper your words in fear of Patriot Acts. And you will have to fight and kill your own before you even get near the IP in charge...cuz I dunno if you've noticed or not, but for every white man and woman on the team, there are FIVE fully Judaized 'troop-supporting' dimwits, who think 'freedom' means 'the freedom to change channels', who will drink Hymie's Kool-Aid without the slightest prodding when he Chicken-Littles them into believing you represent no less than Evil Incarnate.
Oh- one other thing. Any rebellion you attempt will be crushed;which means you'll need the kind of iron determination to lick your wounds, regroup, and try again. And again. The people you want OUT aren't going anywhere -they have the full force of the State behind them, remember? Now how fast would the Civil War have been over if one side (and only one side) had tanks, planes, and smart bombs? A week? A month?
Don't be naive enough to think "when the whites finally have had enough and rise up..." without adding "....we'll be mowed down like Palestinians chucking rocks at an IDF battalion." That .50 caliber slug that will be ripping into you doesn't give a flying f*ck about your noble purpose or high ideals.
If we wanted to WIN....well, then we should've taken steps to keep what we had while we had it: a white nation and Jew-free institutions. Now we want them back? We're gonna have to bleed first. And kill a lot of our countrymen, assuming they don't kill us all first.
2003-04-25 16:05 | User Profile
Il Ragno's post reminded me of something I had tucked away. Sorry to post this whole shebang here, but I got it off the Ygg site some time ago and now it's gone. So, with apologies for length, here it is...
"Revolutionary Majorities" An Essay by L. R. Beam
If citizens of this country ever again enjoy the blessings of liberty and true freedom, it will not be the result of a majority of its citizens having risen up in righteous indignation at governmental abuse of themselves and their culture. If a restoration of the Constitution of our forbearers occurs - with all that this implies - it will probably not be because a plurality of citizens fought for it, supported it, or cared one way or another. If lawful government is reestablished it will come about because a revolutionary majority makes it happen.
Within the American historical experience a revolutionary majority may be defined as any number of citizens sufficient to initiate general hostilities against a destructive government.
The American Revolution of 1776 defines the term, sets the precedent and provides the example for patriots of today.
Throughout most of the Revolutionary War, those patriots who were seeking to overthrow the government lacked support of over two-thirds of their fellow citizens. John Adams, one of the "radicals" in favor of the Revolution and who was later to become the second President of the United States, stated that depending on how the war was going, those fighting for freedom had the opposition of from a third to two thirds of the people. Others like Pennsylvania delegate to the Continental Congress Joseph Galloway was sure that four-fifths of the people "were or wanted to be, loyal to the King." (Galloway eventually sided with the Loyalists, as those who supported the King's government were called.) Colonel London Carter, a member of the Virginia aristocracy and a strong patriot, stated in his diary in March of 1776 (but a bare three months before the signing of the Declaration of Independence) that an observer of events in the Northern colonies was sure "nine-tenths of the people are violently against it" (independence).
The exact number of "the friends of government", as the patriots disparagingly referred to those who opposed the Revolution, cannot be stated with accuracy. As John Adams indicated, the number was in a constant state of flux, depending on political events and who was winning in the armed conflict. One thing is certain, however; the American Revolution was anything but a broad-based popular uprising of a disaffected people. Rather, it was a very unpopular rebellion of a politically radical minority who, because they possessed a clear understanding of the rights of man coupled with a deep concern for the state of relative personal freedom, were able to perceive the shackles of tyranny prior to their being presented for fastening. This discernment of tyranny at a distance not only set them apart from their fellow man but constrained them to rebel.
The radical political leaders of the Revolution such as John Adams, Samuel Adams, Patrick Henry, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, Richard Henry Lee, John Hancock, and Joseph Warren, to name but a few of the more well known, had to conduct their struggle for freedom in the face of disapprobation and rejection by their peers before the time of actual armed conflict, and after its commencement to charges and cries of "incendiaries and traitors." Indeed "the friends of government" knew little restraint when it came to condemning the Republic's Founders. The Loyalists called Washington, among other things; a liar, perjurer, murderer, blasphemer, criminal, traitor, patron of villainy, and a villain's chief. The other Founders fared little better and were variously referred to as being dregs, illiberal (sic!) and violent men, despicable wretches, bandits, rude, and depraved. While thus labeled by "respectable citizens," these men led the country toward rebellion.
Correspondingly, the Founders had an analogous movement among the common people which, although the objective of overthrowing the government was the same, the methods were those resorted to by people in every age when faced with overpowering force of all-powerful government, namely, mob action, riots, uprisings, midnight forays, and harassment, intimidation, or terroristic acts directed against governmental supporters. All of these and other acts came under the single heading of patriotism so far as their perpetrators were concerned.
After a review of non-battlefield hostilities, it becomes apparent that the American Revolution was won more by mob action than by armed conflict! Thus, any idea that the Revolution was won in an ordeal of battle is out of place in view of the facts.
During the entire length of the armed conflict from 1775 to 1781, the King's armies lost only 1,512 men killed in battle; this seven-year, battle-death casualty rate was exceeded by Union forces at Cold Harbor in 1864 during the first eight minutes of a single engagement. The King's armies had previously lost far larger numbers of men in the Seven Years War (French and Indian Wars) yet pressed on to victory. An adequate explanation then of the patriots' final triumph over the government must be provided by other than a military victory.
An answer, in great part, lies in the violence and vigilante action carried on by the patriots against the government and its supporters! Though most Americans today are familiar with the Boston Tea Party, few know much about the secret organization that conducted it, the Sons of Liberty. Led by Samuel Adams, John Hancock, Dr. Warren ("the greatest incendiary of them all"), and Paul Revere, they met in secret, dressed in disguises, and carried out vigilante actions under the cover of darkness. This revolutionary Ku Klux Klan was as much dreaded by "the friends of government" as its ideological offspring, the Klan, ever was by unruly Blacks. The Sons of Liberty and other similar groups were responsible, during the course of the conflict for independence, for causing tens of thousands of Loyalist to flee the country (the Klan was usually satisfied with merely running undesirables out of the county).
The means were simple and effective. Terror and intimidation were directed against the Loyalists. Methods used to create these twin scourges of "the friends of government" included, but were not limited to, whippings, coats of tar and feathers, banishment, church burnings (if run by a Loyalist preacher or used for a Loyalist meeting place), confiscation of property, and wherever deemed necessary - death of any one of several reliable methods.
Other patriotic groups formed throughout the thirteen colonies to carry on a relentless persecution of "the friends of government." Each organization operated independently of the other though often exchanged information on Loyalists.
Often these ad hoc associations went by the name of "Committees of Public Safety," though the name as well as the tactics employed varied from place to place. Thus in the colony of New York, the patriots bluntly called themselves "the oppressors of the friends of government" and stated proudly that they tarred and feathered governmental supporters with the "decorum that ought to be preserved in public punishments." Boston had its mysterious "Joyce Junior" who led a group of Knight Riders and enforcers who saw to it that those who did not display the necessary revolutionary mentality were properly punished. The rebel Continental Congress established "associations," whose purpose was to locate the Loyalists and turn their names over to the local vigilante to be dealt within the manner they deemed proper. In every colony, if the accusation was one of giving information to government agents, the traitor to liberty was hanged by the neck or dealt with in some other terminally appropriate manner.
Even religious leaders were not exempt from the patriotic purges that cleansed away supporters of the king. Preachers who failed to support the cause of liberty (or who had forgotten that David slew Goliath rather than turning the other cheek) were run out of town on a rail in the glowing light of the flames from their quickly disappearing church. This was considered leniency, others were forced to flee to England or Canada in fear of their lives.
By the end of the conflict in 1781, for every government Red-Coat killed on the battlefield, seventy Loyalists had been driven from their homes and forced to settle in England or Canada, totaling over one hundred thousand people.
The government and its "friends" accused the revolutionary freedom fighters (whom they often called "the Sons of Anarchy") of "committing the most shocking outrages" and of "daily invasions upon private property" while led by men who were "well known incendiaries and traitors," whose chief purpose in life was to commit "crimes against the Constitutional authority of the State" (historically, government's which have oppressed and abused their citizens justify their actions based on the "law" or "Constitutional authority").
No doubt, had the effort to overthrow the government been unsuccessful, the Founding Fathers and their citizen supporters would have been hanged by "the friends of government," as the very worst sort of traitors and terrorists.
In summary of the American Revolution, while Washington's determined and skillful leadership of the army, no doubt made victory possible, it did not assure it. The Spirit of '76 - a massive campaign of terror directed by patriotic citizens against all those who supported the government was the deciding factor that brought freedom to America.
American Constitutional liberty was born in mob pressure, fostered by secret societies, nurtured during seven years of intimidating violence, and institutionalized at the expense of well over a hundred thousand people. With this American history in mind, one who is faithful to the ideas of the Founding Fathers of this nation can have nothing but contempt and suspicion of the motives (or ignorance) of those people both within and without the government who would condemn citizens of today "for taking the law into their own hands" in defense of their rights.
Had those who desired liberty in 1776 waited until a numerical majority of their fellow citizens were ready to "wake-up" (as the saying is today) to fight for the overthrow of the government, or had they hesitated in the use of "illegal" force and violence (force and violence are never legal except when used by those in power) against their governmental enemies, they would have all died in their old age as law-abiding subjects of the King - minus their freedom.
Patriots of 1775 considered the sympathies of less than a third of the people sufficient to begin general hostilities against their oppressors. Herein lies the historical context of the American revolutionary majority. It has been wisely said that those who do not know and understand history can repeat its successes.
In America today, the manacles of slavery and destruction once forged in London by the King are now forged in Washington. Acts of tyranny are carried out in the name of the federal government rather than in the name of the Throne. The vicious enforcers of dictatorial policies often call themselves F.B.I. or I.R.S. agents instead of his Royal Majesty's troops or tax collectors of the Realm. Substituting for the Redcoats of the British are the "bluecoats" of the bureaucrats and in far greater numbers. Though babblings for "the divine rights" of kings to rule have ceased, modern fools prattle of "democratic majorities" composed of an illiterate electorate enfranchised for the purpose of dispossessing the descendants of the Founders. While different in nomenclature the end results are exactly the same - the dark, cold, tight chains of slavery.
A numerical majority of today's citizens cannot read these footprints of tyranny nor understand where they lead. In this they are no different than their counterparts of 200 years ago. Modern governments have mass communications to subtly guide the thinking of their subjects; thus is seen the phenomenon of today's citizen rushing forth to place the cuffs of bondage upon his own wrist by irrationally clamoring (as he has been indoctrinated) for more laws and government to solve problems created by an excess of both. This mental inversion, whereby the citizen willfully aids in efforts to subjugate himself, is of no small import for those who treasure their liberty. The implications are many, but the consequences could be singular: a governmentally programmed democratic majority may, as they dance along to mental tunes played by an electronic band of orchestrated communication, gleefully drag down (with their self-fastened chains) everyone else in the black hole of oblivion.
Only one thing seems capable of closing the yawning mouth of the pit and that is the formation of a new revolutionary majority coupled with resurrection of the Spirit of '76. Anything short of this seems certain to pass on to today's children an increasingly difficult task of freeing themselves from transistorized chains of governmental control. Such a legacy is the bequeathal of cowards, not free men.
The first American Revolutionists accused those who ruled them of excessive taxation, interference with property rights, illegal search and seizure, not protecting the citizens from incursions by several thousand Indians, policies destructive of the general welfare, and "altering fundamentally the form of our government," among other things.
Today the federal government taxes its subjects for forty percent of their income, instead of the three percent (less than a dollar twenty a year) tax of the King; interferes with the ownership and use of virtually every description of property; authorizes everything from game wardens to I.R.S. agents to search, arrest, or seize property without a warrant. It allows fifteen million aliens to illegally cross its borders in less than a ten-year period; and conducts a policy of systematic extermination of its young men through no-win wars, and subjects the Founders' children to enforced equality. Each of the acts, individually amounts to altering fundamentally the form and purpose for which the federal government was created. Taken as a whole, they are a cry for - nay - a demand for, a new campaign of terror conducted against the government and its friends in the great American tradition of 1776.
An examination of the depth and magnitude of policies fostered by federal rulers detrimental to the people of present day America make the abuses of the English King's government pale into insignificance. One thing is clear; comparison of the criminal acts of the two governments makes those who value their liberty and freedom long for the bitter days of English despotism.
While there are many similarities between the first American Revolution and the second (coming soon at a place near you), there are also significant differences.
The first and paramount dissimilarity is that while our heroic Forefathers fought to overthrow their legally constituted government and were thus revolutionaries in the truest sense of the word, those who seek to break the quickly tightening bands of servitude today war against an illegal government that imposes itself upon the people under the color of the law. By the Washington regime's disobedience to and violation of the bonds of the Constitution, established by the Founders of this country, it has made of itself an unlawful body with no more right to govern the American people than has the present Queen of England. That the government survives despite the crimes it has committed is explainable only because the atrocities it systematically imposes are papered over with a veneer of legality. Propaganda that numbs the mind keeps people from rising against those who abuse them.
There is no law in this country - other than power, which currently rests with the Pirates of the Potomac, who pose as our lawful government while using over powering force to quell those who resist their destructive policies. The Constitutional Revolutionist of today is actually fighting for a transfer of power from those who can make no legitimate claim to power, to those who inherently hold it as a natural right - the lawful citizens of this country.
Another salient difference between the first American Revolution and the second is the contrast between the quality of the people of then and now. Our ancestors were strong men, who stated often that they were resolved "to die as free men rather than live as slaves." They were conditioned to doing their own thinking while at the same time ever holding before themselves the guiding lights of honor and duty.
Today, raised in the lap of luxury, many people gladly exchange their freedom for the right to accumulate material possessions. Not one person in fifty can truthfully state that his opinions are the result of independent research rather than the mindless acquisition of pre-programmed "opinions" obtained by indulging in endless hours of obeisant T.V. watching (that modern day golden calf of those lost in the mental wilderness). Further, most Americans do not know the meanings nor values of honor and duty, the two great concepts of higher man.
It is quite clear that the virtue of the present generation has declined to such a miserable degree that most people will never voluntarily help to make themselves free. Consequently they will have to be made to make themselves free.
A great objective of revolutionary majorities is that of thrusting freedom upon those who are too weak to make themselves free while providing its blessings for the stronger, more noble elements of the race. This is done in the firm belief that under sound government, future generations will be naturally healthy in mind and spirit. The revolutionary patriot benignantly grants freedom to others while establishing framework that will allow posterity to be both free and strong. Other than the "great commission" of the Lord, no calling is as exalted or as honorable. These two significant differences - one of law, one of character - between the first struggle for freedom and the present one is deserving of substantial thought and analysis by those capable of so doing. Consider what type of self-preserving behavior can be expected from a government that already wades to its knees in the blood of young men deliberately sacrificed to the false god of Internationalism. Were the government really intent on opposing Communism, it would start a war in Washington and work its way to Vietnam. What behavior can be expected from a people who willingly pass their sons through the fire to be consumed? Each of these concepts deserve most careful examination.
Opposing the federal purveyors of mass murder and the "the friends of government" who make such perfidy possible are men who trace their political lineage to times of Magna Carta, and who are mental as well as physical descendants of the Founding Fathers. They believe, as did their forbearers, that government is a social contract entered into by people of a similar mind for their mutual benefit. This agency created by the people can only, legitimately, be their servant - never their master. Further, it cannot possess lawful authority to deprive those who create it (or their heirs) of natural rights. In normal times men who arrayed themselves against the criminal acts of government would be called Constitutionalists, but "these are the times that try mens souls" as well as test their courage. Thus contemporary patriots become known as Constitutional Revolutionists determined to overthrow every vestige of unlawful government doing so with a firm belief that honor demands and duty requires the reestablishment of the law of their fathers.
It can be realized then, that those who remain guilty of loyalty to the present illegal government in the District of Columbia are chargeable with treason to the Constitution of the United States and deserving the same fate of their historical predecessors who, in the name of the King, trampled upon sacred rights of Englishmen in 1776.
It should be stated in their defense, however, that most of those who are participants in this odious transgression against the good of our noble forbearers do so in complete ignorance of the law. Having obtained ninety-five percent of their misinformation from government licensed T.V. and the remaining five percent from conversations with others who are also completely maladroit at obtaining facts on their own, they are victims of methodical thought control which began during their childhood and has been continued at a subliminal level throughout their lives.
Though no doubt the maxim "ignorance of the law is no excuse for its violation" makes these people criminals, the mitigating circumstances of their lawlessness should be considered by those who are seeking to reestablish lawful rule in this country.
A period of grace, commensurable with what the struggle will allow, is in order, thus providing the present supporters of unlawful government an opportunity to defect as they became cognizant of the law.
By this fraternal act to the erring members of our race we serve not only the interest of justice but, at whatever point in time the grace period is of necessity terminated, all excuse for collaboration with the enemy will have been removed. Having held long aloft the olive branch of peace and forgiveness, no just complaint can be made by those who failed to avail themselves of it, when with the other hand, the terrible swift sword of vindication falls upon their necks.
Even after the patriots of today have invoked "the Spirit of '76," and have successfully dammed the Mississippi with rotting corpses of the lying politicians, criminal bureaucrats, racial traitors, communists, assorted degenerates, cultural distorters, and those who resist the implementation of lawful Constitutional government, these patriots will have exhibited far more restraint and benevolence than the present government of the United States. For while Constitutionalists of today war against those guilty of the most heinous crimes upon our people, usurpers in Washington destroy in mind and wherever possible the bodies of those guilty of nothing more than having white skin.
Coalescing within America today is a second revolutionary majority whose members in the spirit of their forbearers are resolved to die as free men rather than to live as slaves. Like their noble ancestors, today's revolutionary majority must fight for the children of carping critics just as fiercely as for their own families. Emulating its predecessor, obedience is given only to the dictates of the code of natural law. For once again the enemies of liberty use the law of the nation as their shield - yea - even their justification for destroying freedom of the people. A government exceeding the power granted by their fathers - they are not bound to obey but bound to resist.
John Adams said, that "freedom is a counter balance for poverty, discord, and war," and that if the revolutionary struggle failed, it would be because moderates tried to find a "middle ground" and to conduct "half a war," for freedom. Likewise, today's tired voices are heard calling for politics as usual - moderation as always. Such thinking has allowed generations to die in chains in former times and will so again if adhered to.
The age of the conservative like that of the dinosaur, has ended. Now begins a new age, destiny calls for her great men who by their iron will alter the pages of history from that of a tale of shame, cowardice, and decline, to a saga of glory, bravery, and rebirth. Soon, very soon, we will have a revolutionary majority...
2003-04-25 17:36 | User Profile
Originally posted by il ragno@Apr 25 2003, 03:36 ** Nothing spoken of here is by definition 'unattainable', if for no other reason than we once had it. Thus, it can be had.
All it requires is we do, here, the sort of thing the Jews are having us do in the Middle East. Regime change, by force of arms.
**
il, I don't doubt that the stakes are high enough for blood to hit the ground. Nor do I fail to understand that the mere comprehension of that possibility is so unnerving that it interferes with objective analysis of our situation. As in, "Oh, God, if that's the case, do I even really want to think about this topic? Wouldn't it be easier to just go along? Can't I numb my lobes into happier thoughts? I want my mommy!"
And Dr. Pierce said White men were passive and feminized. Shows what that old coot knew.
But are you underestimating the potential of a White awakening? With enough of a critical mass of racially awakened Whites, do you suppose things would just... slide into place? People have a tendency to figure out which way the wind is blowing. If they sense a stiff wind a' comin', they often just move along. For every revolutionary willing to kill or be killed for the cause, there stand meek hundreds who will just get on the bus like they're told.
I also can't help but wonder how much modern media has changed the lay of the land. We live in a television age that is rapidly becoming an Internet age. The former had Jews on top, the latter has us making gains.
*MadScience, great essay. Thanks for finding and posting it.
2003-04-25 18:26 | User Profile
Yes, it is possible to attain what was once ours, and will be again. The main issue to present to un-awakened whites is the fact that our country is at a dead end and cannot progress any further than it already is, unless of course, progression is seen as a good trip through hell in a broken handbasket. We must turn around and leave this dead end of diversity.
We must reach out to our racial kinsmen and kinswomen in a fashion that offers political change for the betterment of our race, social-economic change for the betterment of our race, proper education for our White children, free from the mind-rot being pumped into them at "Public" schools.
The effort starts in your own neighborhood and spreads to outlying areas. Eventually, some areas will meet others, till consolidation is achieved and strength begans to build.
There are different organizations that are working in their respective fashions to combat the Jew controlled T V and Radio constantly being blared at us and our children. Have you seen childrens programing lately? It shows pure filth, racemixing and homosexual glorification.
This is the poison and mind rot that is aimed specifically at White Children, to subvert their minds into obediant servants to the new, non english speaking masters of American Destiny.
From the time you first hold your child in your arms till the time they move away, a parent has to set the racial and spiritual example for that child, the rock, the light to be guided by. We must look into our White children's eyes and tell them everyday about their rightful place in the world, above all races, not equal to muds, and other filth. Equality is a Jewish lie, perpetrated by Jews, the seed of Satan. ( Read John 8:32 - 47 ) So many white relationships are torn apart and white children grow up in a fatherless environment that is eagerly exploited by the Jew and it's kind. Negroes and it's seed prey upon these children everyday seeking to destroy the White child's future. Race traitor politicians line up to sell our White heritage and future to line their own pockets with blood money. Blood that was shed for our freedom and posterity for our children. Our forefathers did not shed blood, kill, or die so some Somalian could come here and dictate terms on our soil, or for some Mexican to come here and exploit our resources for their gain. Negroes were NEVER to be considered, "equals", it did not matter if they were free or not, they were considered animals, beasts, and regardless of Jew induced social status, they still are!
Something must cut through the darkness, shine as a beacon in the night, a glimmer of hope in this dark and dreary nation that has fallen under Jewish subversion and control. Jews. Jews that reject Christ, yet come here to flee the curse that is brought upon them by a Holy and Just God. Read Isaiah 65:8 - 15. But as they come here and pervert our nation and subvert our national interests they also bring with them the curse as those that murdered Christ, for they mocked Him and said let His blood be upon them!
What can shine through the darkness? What offers a glimmer of hope?
It is you.
Each and every White indivual needs to get involved with a White Nationalist organization that they are comfortable with. Then, those involved must focus on the goal of taking what was and still is rightfully their's. Yes, it is a slow process. BUT, IT STARTS IN YOUR OWN NEIGHBORHOOD.
Why nationally known organizations? Because, they have the building blocks, the literature to spread, booklets to pass out, the guidlines on professional activism and social conduct.
You are needed. You are wanted. You must act or You will die and your children will suffer under the heel of a non-white. When your children are under the yoke of a Jew or other mud, they will curse your name. Cowards deserve to have their graves turned into outhouse foundations. The children of cowards will serve their new masters. The children will be made to accept the new masters language and traditions and customs as we see happening in our schools today.
But, if you stand now, and get active, they will sing your praises. They will embrace their heritage and will salute the flags of their forefathers.
I stand with The Knights of the Ku Klux Klan.
2003-04-25 19:13 | User Profile
Hugh,
You're welcome. Actually, I got the link thanks to a now-disappeared OD member, Red.
Louis Beam is an interesting fella. Did you know he's one of the few people in modern American history to be charged with sedition? Not only that, he was acquitted! The snippets of the transcripts from the trial in Fort Smith, Arkansas (in 1988, I believe) I've seen makes for some fascinating reading. I'll see if I can dig it up and post it here.
2003-04-26 02:42 | User Profile
Golf --
Nice to see you K people out and about on the BBs....welcome to OD.
I used to have a few K guys on my big [now-semi-defunct] e-list; my small e-list remains, though....ya gotta rant somehow....
:th:
2003-04-26 02:54 | User Profile
Separated from reality. It is not going to happen. Accept it. Go try and form your own country, do it white bond. You cannot, and you shall not. Although the facts speak for themselves It doesn't change real facts..... so the whiteness you take pride in must find other avenues in which to assert itself. Can you do it ?
2003-04-26 03:01 | User Profile
Let me also say that ALmighty God has told you that there is no glory in any flesh. ANY. To take pride in a whiteness or any other physical condition is to SIN. Do not continue in your paths.. stop and think. Respect the unseen. Respect the force of truth and lay no faith in your flesh and bone. You die with flesh. You rot and stink. Your spiritual condition is not appealing to He which can save you.. worry in fear, as you should, as I do.
2003-04-26 19:11 | User Profile
What is this??????
**Originally posted by Exelsis_Deo
** Let me also say that ALmighty God has told you that there is no glory in any flesh. ANY. To take pride in a whiteness or any other physical condition is to SIN.****
Hello pickle head. You better quote scripture on this issue. We are to respect our temples ( bodies ) and not become spotted ( racially mixed )
Exelsis_Deo, someone has already played you to the left, like Jeff.
Do not continue in your paths.. stop and think.****
Yes, you should! Your intentions of perverse nature is seen here with no misunderstanding of the intent of your posting.
Respect the unseen.****
I FEAR IT. It is a terrible thing to be in the hands of a living God.
Respect the force of truth and lay no faith in your flesh and bone.****
You are not to racemix! Respect your skin. Worship God. Respect your body. Follow Christ, for he is not come to send peace to the earth, He comes with a sword. He segregates.
You die with flesh. You rot and stink. Your spiritual condition is not appealing to He which can save you****
What is this spiritual condition? This is not the Christianity section, but, let me point something out to you Exelsis_Deo, some light in this dark and lonely world you live in.
The Holy Bible has indicated God's purpose concerning racial segregation and homosexuality and bastard race children, mongrels.
You may try to explain in the most pitiful and vain attempt of why those that follow Jesus should exercise, "Tolerance", but, I assure you, we are not to tolerate others that do. I will not share fellowship with filthy people or apostate churches preaching tolerance and acceptance for racemixers, their children or pedophiles or other queers.
I notice that you quote II Corinthians in your sig, I like Corinthians I & II lets look at I Corinthians chapter 6 from the K J V 1611:
1 Corinthians 6
Now wait a minute! Why does verse 9 have fornicators seperate from adulterers? Would it be to show that these are separate issues, such as the one issue of fooling around on your spouse and the separate issue of racemixing?
Why, I believe that is what this is referring to!
Whew! That is pretty forthright. I believe that God wants us to separate.
Do you think that includes you, Exelsis_Deo? Think again!
You see Exelsis_Deo, you or any apostate church does not set what God is or what He is not.
Do you understand this, Exelsis_Deo?
Again, the scripture points out responsibility with the flesh, the body.
You have much to learn Exelsis_Deo.
Lets look at II Corinthians chapter 6:
2 Corinthians 6
I believe that it is in our best interest to separate from the racemixers and their churches and their kind, for they are filthy and abominable, unacceptable to a Holy God.
.. worry in fear, ....., as I do. ** ** Yes, you should.
2003-04-27 01:03 | User Profile
** Originally posted by Exelsis_Deo
Let me also say that ALmighty God has told you that there is no glory in any flesh. ANY. To take pride in a whiteness or any other physical condition is to SIN. **
Golfball --
Yes, I did find that comment odd, this being OD.
2003-04-28 20:58 | User Profile
An admonition not to take pride in my skin? Great. Next, I'll get a lecture on how we're all God's children, therefore, I should just cluck my tongue when White women are raped by simian beasts. The insistence that I am wrongly "taking pride" in my skin color is a gross misunderstanding of my White nationalist sentiments. I don't even know what to suggest you read, Mr. Deo, but how about some basic Jared Taylor, or that "What Is Racism" essay on Stormfront?
I take pride in who I am. I realize that I am White. I realize that I get along better with people who are also White. I realize that I have racial enemies. There's nothing "sinful" about any of that. I'm not really taking pride in a damn thing. I want a peaceful and progressive life here on Earth with my racial kin and without the interference of the muds and the Jews. That's as pure as it gets.
Now, back to the practicalities of racial separatism...
2003-04-30 02:06 | User Profile
Originally posted by Franco@Apr 26 2003, 19:03 ** Golfball --
Yes, I did find that comment odd, this being OD. **
The whole idea of "it is a sin to care about your skin", is a jewish perversion of the Christian church. It immediately got my attention as to the purpose of what was posted in the context of the message.
However, lest others think all "christians" think that tolerance is Holy writ, I can point to scripture that expressly forbids race mixing and queerdom.
This view that Jesus is all about love, is another Jewish/Judeo-christian lie.
It is very easy to point out the true reasons why Christians must seperate from non-whites, and Jews, their kind and other sexual deviants. It is ordained by God.