Wednesday, June 3, 2020

Holocaust Beliefs Since 1945

By Jürgen Graf
Published 1997

For a half century, all of humanity knew, or thought it knew, that something uniquely cruel took place during WWII, when Germany was fighting nearly every other major country in the world. 

Of course, it is true that atrocities were in fact committed during the war – atrocities which were unprecedented in their degree of unique cruelty. These atrocities were as follows: 

– The merciless, systematic terror bombing by the Western Allies [jews] of German and Japanese cities. For the first time in the history of the civilized world, a belligerent sought openly and without pretense to kill or maim the greatest possible number of human beings, including the elderly, women and children, without any military justification, and to destroy as many cultural monuments as possible. At Dresden, in February 1945, when the war was all but over, 250,000(++) human beings were burned alive or buried under the ruins of their houses in a single night. In August of the same year, the US dropped the atomic bombs on a Japan which was already prepared to capitulate; 

The mass murder of prisoners of war. In this unique atrocity, the Allies deliberately allowed enormous numbers of prisoners of war to starve to death or to die of exhaustion. It is recognized that 1.5 million German prisoners in the USSR died this way. That the Western democracies cold-bloodedly permitted at least 800,000, possibly more than a million, prisoners of war to die of hunger, was hushed up in shame for decades, and first came to light through the research of the courageous historian James Bacque;

The greatest mass expulsion in human history, far exceeding anything occurring in past centuries. Between 1944 and 1949, approximately 15 million Germans were driven from the homes in which their ancestors had lived peacefully for many generations, and were thrown onto the roads under conditions so inhumane that Europe had not seen the like since the Thirty Years War. These mass expulsions – unique in their cruelty – caused two million deaths from cold, exhaustion, starvation, and deliberate massacres. 

And yet – all these horrors are hardly even noticed when there is talk of WWII atrocities. When people talk of THE unique crime of the century – a crime which staggers the imagination – we immediately sense that we are about to hear – once again – of the German genocide of the jews. 

There is only group with victim status: the Six Million 

There is only one scene of any crime: Auschwitz 

There is only one group of unique criminals: the “Nazis” 

There is only one new, horrifying weapon: the “gas chambers”. 

These concepts are deeply anchored in the sub-consciousness of all of humanity; they are drummed into our brains, on television, radio, and the press almost daily; they appear in all the history books, at least in the Western world. 

These four concepts – Six Million, Auschwitz, “Nazis,” and Gas Chambers – are the concrete symbol of Absolute Evil in the minds of all humanity. And since every decent person must naturally abhor Evil, innumerable numbers of decent people therefore believe themselves morally compelled to hate, or at least to mistrust, the nationality of people who were responsible for this unique crime – the German people, who were, at that time, almost 100% in favour of Hitler and the National Socialist government, a fact which is beyond dispute. 

It appears no less logical that the victims of this absolute evil, the jews, should, by the same logic, be treated with the greatest possible sympathy and respect. Of course, this includes the decency of refraining from asking for any proof of their unspeakable suffering – these people who are so deserving of our sympathy, who have suffered so unspeakably. Every decent human being must listen with the greatest solemnity, the profoundest grief, and without the slightest questioning, to all the details of the monstrous tale of the assembly-line extermination of an entire people, then cry out in righteous indignation: Never Again! 

This assembly-line style extermination of human beings is commonly known as the “Holocaust”, from the Greek word for “sacrifice by fire” (holos = entirely; kaein = to burn). Another term, which is less commonly used, but which is preferred by jews, is “Shoa” (Hebrew for “catastrophe”). 

The terms “Holocaust” and “Shoa” are an indictment of the German people and its ruling government from 1933 to 1945, an indictment which, in terms of severity, has never been made against any other people or government at any time in history. 

This indictment runs as follows: 

In the midst of the 20th century, in the heart of Europe, the Germans, over a period of three years (from the autumn of 1941 until the autumn of 1944), murdered five to six million jewish men, women, and children, almost unnoticed by the world. This genocide is said to have been carried out based on a diabolical plan, carefully hatched by the NS government. The majority of the victims – from slightly less than three million to more than five million, depending on which historian you believe – were killed with a previously unknown weapon, i.e., gas chambers (with gas vans playing second fiddle). These mass murders are supposed to have taken place in six extermination camps located on Polish territory, namely Auschwitz, Majdanek, Sobibor, Treblinka, and Chelmno. The last mentioned camp used gas vans; the five others used stationary gas chambers. Some of the bodies were burned in crematoria, and some in the open, leaving not a rack behind. 

The Germans also liquidated between one and two million jews in Russia, some of them in gas vans, some by mass shooting. These massacres were committed mostly by a special murder squad, the “Einsatzgruppen”. 

After that come another half million or more jews who are said to have died in ghettos and work camps from mistreatment, malnutrition, and exhaustion. These are, of course, included among the number of jewish victims, almost Six Million – (three to five million or more gassed in the six death camps, plus one to two million shot in Russia or murdered in gas vans; plus at least half a million more, from more or less “natural causes”) – but who were not the result of a deliberate policy of extermination; non-jewish prisoners also died in great numbers for the same reasons. Although these jews cannot really be included as “Holocaust victims”, they are included among them for the sake of simplicity. 

Morally, according to half a century of deafening media propaganda, the Holocaust cannot be equated with any other atrocity in history. Stalin may have killed tens of millions more than Hitler, but he never ordered an entire race wiped out without a trace, without any examination of individual cases. The Germans didn’t commit the Holocaust because they considered the jews a real or potential threat, but solely and merely because the victims were jews. The Germans, according to their accusers, exterminated an entire people out of pure RACIAL HATRED. This racial hatred was the reason why they killed not just the men, the fighting-fit, but the elderly, women and children, including the newborn – everyone who could be called a “jew”. 

Compared to the “Holocaust”, all other “’Nazi’ crimes” pale into insignificance! 

a) “The three million non-jewish Poles” 

In addition to the genocide of the jews, the Third Reich is accused of other gigantic crimes. 

For example, the claim is sometimes made in the media that the National Socialists killed three million non-jewish Poles. The unprejudiced observer will perhaps wonder as to the circumstances under which so many Poles are said to have been killed. Between the end of the short German-Polish war of September 1939 and the uprising in the Warsaw Ghetto of 1944, which cost 180,000 victims, there were, of course, attacks by the Resistance resulting in German reprisals, but there was no large-scale conflict. There is no allegation of any mass-extermination of non-jewish Poles in the camps. How are the three million Poles supposed to have been killed? No Western historian has ever made a serious attempt to establish the figure. 25 

b) “The 500,000 gypsies” 

Claims of the alleged 500,000 gypsies exterminated by the Germans are heard with incomparably greater frequency than the claims of the three million non-jewish Poles. With regards to the extermination of the gypsies, Sebastien Haffner, in a book praised to the skies by the media, states as follows: 

“After 1941, the gypsies in the occupied territories were exterminated just as systematically as the jews who lived there. This mass murder has… hardly ever been researched in detail since that time. People didn’t talk about it when it was going on; even today, people don’t know much about it, except that it took place. Documents are rare. Estimates of the number of victims range up to 500,000.” 

According to the above, the genocide of the gypsies has hardly been ever researched and the documents are “rare” (i.e., there aren’t any), but we still know that the extermination took place! 

That this slaughter is the purest fantasy, has been proven by Udo Walendy in great detail. The edition of Walendy’s periodical Historische Tatsachen which discussed this topic was prohibited, although the authorities could not point to a single sentence in it which was not true. 

The alleged genocide of the gypsies has not penetrated the public consciousness as deeply as the jewish Holocaust. In monuments to the “Nazi” victims, the “Sinti und Roma” – the politically correct expression for the gypsies – appear as “also rans” at best. The gypsies themselves, of course, make energetic attempts to obtain compensation from Bonn, but the sums obtained thus far have been monetarily insignificant; this is doubtlessly due to the general lack of political and economic clout possessed by gypsies. 

In early 1997, the historical researchers threw in the towel. The Frankfurter Rundschau of 13 February 1997 (p. 7), in particular, reports, with reference to the historian Michael Zimmerman: 

“Only after a thorough study of the documents was it discovered that the number of murdered Sinti und Roma was significantly lower than the figure current in the media: 50,000 instead of 500,000.” 

Please don’t get the idea that the figure of 500,000 exterminated gypsies was invented and peddled by lie-historians, lie-politicians, and the lie-media for fifty years, without the slightest proof; instead, it arose spontaneously, a product of spontaneous generation, after which it merely became “current in the media”! Regardless of this admission from the historians themselves, the mythical 500,000 murdered gypsies will no doubt continue to stalk the pages of the tabloids of the future as they did in the past – like ghosts. (That the new figure of 50,000 murdered Sinti and Roma announced by “historical researchers” lacks even the slightest trace of proof, goes without saying.) 

c) Medical experiments on human beings 

That there were medical experiments in the NS concentration camps, is undisputed, and it is not our intention to justify them. But the Eastern and Western conquerors of Germany have not the slightest right to become indignant about the matter, because they who live in glass houses should not throw stones. 

As shown in detail in the French newspaper Nouvelle Vision, the Soviets as well as the Americans also carried out medical experiments on human beings, to an incomparably greater degree than the National Socialists. The following are only three examples: 

In Kazakhstan in the USSR , the Soviets set off 446 atomic bombs. A total of 800 villages were affected by the radioactive fallout. In many cases, the villagers were forbidden to enter their houses at the time of the blast, allegedly due to the danger of collapsing buildings; in reality, this order was given to test the effects of radioactivity on the victims. According to the Ministry of Health of Kazakhstan, the life expectancy in the affected areas is now 15 years lower than the national average; 

Radioactive experiments were carried out on human beings in the USA as well. In December 1993, the US authorities admitted that, in Tennessee in the 1940s, 700 pregnant women were prescribed radioactive pills, exposing the fetus to radioactive radiation. Many children born to mothers involved in these experiments died prematurely of cancer. Other radioactive experiments on human beings were performed in Oregon in 1963; 

In 1954, the first oral contraceptive developed in the USA was not tested on American women, but on Puerto Ricans instead. Since animal experimentation had already proven the pill’s carcinogenic effects, researchers were well aware of the dangers to the women involved, and therefore chose foreigners as test subjects. 

Many more examples could be cited. 

d) Euthanasia 

Between 50,000 and 100,000 severely ill patients were killed in Germany after the autumn of 1939 in the context of the euthanasia programme permitting the killing of physically and psychically incurably ill. The euthanasia programme was stopped as the result of protests from the Catholic Bishop Galen and the Evangelical Bishop Wurm. 

Opinion differs as to the justification for euthanasia. Strict Christians – particularly, Fundamentalists – reject it on the grounds that human life is to be considered holy and sacrosanct. Other well-meaning people advocate euthanasia on the grounds that incurably ill patients can only suffer, constituting a burden to themselves and their loved ones, and that such a life is unworthy of human beings, a life no longer worth living. We do not wish to take a position on the matter, but we wish to point out the following:  

Hundreds of thousands of healthy children are aborted on “social grounds” in the “democracies” every year, i.e., they are killed in their mother’s womb, either chopped to bits or killed with corrosive solutions or acids. Is this any more humane than the painless killing of much smaller numbers of the incurably ill in the Third Reich? 

Both passive euthanasia (failing to take measures to prolong life) and active euthanasia (killing the sick) are gaining increasingly greater numbers of adherents every day. The world’s best known advocate of euthanasia is the “Australian” jew, Singer. Particularly to the forefront in the legalization of euthanasia is the most “antifascist” country in the world: Holland. 

To sum up: the criticisms made above are insufficient to justify any criminalization of the National Socialist system, not to mention the German people as a whole. Nor do the murder of the “three million non-jewish Poles” and the “500,000 gypsies” suffice either, because these huge massacres are pure products of the imagination. “Medical experiments on human beings” are insufficient, since the Soviets and Americans carried out similar practices on a much larger scale. Euthanasia is insufficient, because it is officially tolerated in several European countries today – not to mention the fact that it is surely much less heinous than aborting millions of healthy children, even if we consider euthanasia a crime. 

The Holocaust as a religion 

Claude Lanzmann, producer of the nine-and-one-half hour film Shoa, has made the following incredibly revealing statement : 

“If Auschwitz is something other than a horror of history, if it goes beyond the ‘banality of evil’, then Christianity totters on its foundations. Christ is the Son of God, who went to the end of the humanly endurable, where he endured the cruelest suffering… If Auschwitz is true, then there is a human suffering which simply cannot be compared with that of Christ… In this case, Christ is false, and salvation will not come from Him… If the pain of Auschwitz is much more extreme than that of the Apocalypse, much more horrifying than that described by John in the Apocalypse (since the Apocalypse can be described as, and even resembles, a huge, Hollywood-style spectacular, while Auschwitz is inexpressible and indescribable), then the Book of the Apocalypse is false, and the Gospels are false, too. Auschwitz is the refutation of Christ.” 

One could hardly provide a more drastic demonstration that, for increasingly greater numbers of jews, the Holocaust has become a genuine religion. Perhaps two jews out of three jews believe in God, but 99.9% of them believe in the gas chambers. If this murky religion were restricted to jews, that would be their own affair; basically, it would be their problem, not ours; yet ominously, increasingly shameless attempts have been made in recent years to force this jewish Holocaust religion upon non-jews by criminal law. 

If “Auschwitz” is true, salvation will not come from Christ, says Lanzmann – so where is it going to come from, then? Quite obviously from the jews, who have now been transubstantiated into a sort of collective Messiah because of Auschwitz! The 28 arch-enemy of the new collective Messiah is therefore the “National Socialist regime of the gas chambers and the Holocaust” – the incorporation of Absolute Evil. 

The ever-growing numbers of Holocaust memorials are quite obviously part of this religious – or rather pseudo-religious – framework. “Doubting the Holocaust” (the official version of the Holocaust, that is) has, in the meantime, been made punishable by criminal prosecution in several countries, so that the picture is now complete: as a religious dogma, the Holocaust must remain exempt from all scientific research and be taken on faith (or else). 

The Swiss writer Arthur Vogt has described the “Holocaust religion” very perceptively: 

“First principle of faith: the Germans, as a race of criminals, have been cursed with eternal shame… Even their descendants bear the mark of Cain, merely because they are German… Second principle: There is only one salvation from this terrible guilt, and that is: constant acknowledgement and remorse for the crime. That is the reason for all the memorials and anniversaries… The Holocaust religion recognizes good works: this is why the German government must support the construction of Israel with billions of marks in so-called ‘reparations’. Personal atonement is performed by young Germans – for example, through the activities of the ‘Symbol of Reconciliation’ – through taking care of the elderly in Israel or rebuilding crumbling walls at Auschwitz. 

“So much money and effort have been invested in the Holocaust religion, and continue to be invested in it, that if the factual basis for it were found to be erroneous, it would be an incredible shock. Yet it is the basis of the founding myth of Israel (and the BRD); it is the most important founding element in the identity of the jews today, both believers and non-believers. To point out the existence of contradictions and errors in the so-called “evidence” is heresy… The Holocaust religion also has its heretics, whom it persecutes mercilessly. These are the revisionists, who dare to question the established version of history. They are slandered and persecuted all over the world, under the influence of powerful Zionist groups.” 

Why nearly everybody believes in the Holocaust 

No doubt the overwhelming majority of human beings, at least in the Western states, believe in the official version of the Holocaust for reasons which at first glance appear entirely plausible: 

First, it seems entirely inconceivable that the media as a whole would be able to spread a story like that for over 50 years unless there was some truth in the story, at least very generally. The average citizen, of course, can still imagine that the numbers of victims may have been exaggerated; but the notion that the gas chamber story, taken as a whole, could be purely a product of fantasy, is far too monstrous to consider. In addition, the correctness of the official version of the Holocaust appears confirmed by three factors: 

the general disappearance of the jews from several former German-ruled countries, particularly Poland, where three million jews are acknowledged to have lived in the early 1930s, but where only a few tens of thousands live today, according to official statistics. So if they weren’t exterminated, is the question, where did they go? 

We will only examine the demographic aspect of the question at the end of our study; for the moment, we will consider only one single argument in reply: at the end of WWII, there were approximately 12 million Germans in the areas east of the Oder and Neisse. There are only between one and two million there today. Does that really mean that 10 to 11 million Germans in the Eastern territories were exterminated? Of course, the answer is no; some of them died during the violence of the expulsion, of course, but most of them escaped to the West and survived the war. According to this logic, then, the general disappearance of “Polish” jewry is no proof that most of the jews in these territories were exterminated. They could have escaped or emigrated. 

The alleged “innumerable eyewitness testimonies”. “It may well be”, people cry in profound indignation, “that a few witnesses may have lied or exaggerated the horrors of the Holocaust, but all of them? It’s unthinkable!” This argument is based upon a misunderstanding. There are far fewer witnesses to the extermination of the jews in the gas chambers than is commonly assumed. Anyone who consults the standard literature will soon note that, basically, only a handful of witnesses are quoted: Gerstein, Höss, Broad, Vrba, Mueller, Bendel, Lengyel, Tauber, Nyiszli, and a few more. Since there are no forensic or documentary proofs for the mass killings in the gas chambers – as we shall soon show in detail – the entire Holocaust allegation basically stands or falls with the testimony of perhaps two dozen standard eyewitnesses. The great majority of the alleged “innumerable witnesses” only heard of the gas chambers second or third hand; 

The photos and films. It is quite true that there are authentic photographs of piles of corpses and living skeletons from German concentration camps; these photographs were taken after their liberation by Allied troops. But they are no proof of any systematic “extermination of the jews”, since even the official version of the story does not dispute the fact that these dead and dying men were the victims of starvation and epidemic disease during the chaotic last few months of the war. 

In addition to these authentic photos, there are a number of grossly falsified photos, which have been distributed widely for decades. Udo Walendy has helped prove their inauthenticity. 

These manipulations in themselves, of course, are insufficient to prove that “there wasn’t any Holocaust”; but they should awaken our suspicion. Why must one have recourse to such primitive trickery if great quantities of unimpeachable evidence are available? 

The argument “But I saw it myself in the movies and on television” can only be the product of a very feeble mind. All the films of the genocide of the jews, from Holocaust to Shoa to Schindler’s List, were produced long after the war; that they lack any probative value is a matter of course. It’s no accident that a miserable botch job like Schindler’s List was cooked up in black-and-white. This was done to create a false impression of authenticity for historically naive cinema-goers.

Wednesday, May 27, 2020

Adolf Hitler About the Law

Necessary is... a reform of the law. Present law is only the law of the individual. It does not know the protection of the race, the protection of the folk community. Soiling of national honor, of national greatness (was) permitted. Law, which distances itself so much from the concept of the folk community, requires reform.

Speech of April 27, 1923 in Munich

Our legal system must first serve the preservation of this folk- community. The irremovability of the judges on the one side must correspond to an elasticity of judgment for the benefit of society. Not the individual can be the center point of legal concern, rather the folk. Treason against country and treason against folk should in the future be purged with all ruthlessness. The basis for the existence of jurisprudence can be no other than the basis of the existence of the nation.

Speech of March 23, 1933 in Berlin

All great legislative works have the advantage of making use of a certain lapidary brevity. In such cases the legislator has the task to seek out the damaged point on the motor of communal life and there create change. A sharp distinction must thus be made between the law and the temporary execution regulations. The purpose must not only lie at the basis of the law, rather the purpose must also be clearly visible in each line.

Open Letter to Brüning of December 13, 1931

The worth of a law lies neither in the time spent for it nor in the external magnitude, rather exclusively in the final spiritual content. The lightning of a genius has in all times more thoroughly enlightened the world than a thousand smoking pitch-torches of much of the art of decrees and legislation.

Open letter to Brüning of December 13, 1931

We have...begun the struggle for new law. We want to restore trust in our jurisprudence. For this purpose, we set the principle that everybody is equal before the law and before right, and we have hesitated not a second to reach into the Reich Cabinet in order to have an offender punished without consideration of who he was and what he was.

Speech of October 24, 1933 in Berlin

Sunday, May 24, 2020

Wednesday, May 20, 2020

Toward a Healthy Society

By Dr. William L. Pierce

I’ve spoken before about the deliberately destructive role of the mass media in American society. I’ve talked about the psychology of liberalism, about what makes liberals do the crazy and destructive things they do. Today, though, instead of talking about the enemies of our society, the enemies of our people, let’s just talk about our people and the sort of society that we need.

You know, a society is a very complex thing: it is like a living organism. It responds to selective environmental forces, and it evolves. In past ages it was the struggle of our people to survive, the competition of our people against other peoples, other races, which determined the nature of our society. Societies which functioned well survived. Societies which didn’t function well perished. Historically, if some crazy liberal came along and were able to change all of the rules and structures in a society to suit some egalitarian fantasy of his, the society would sink like a rock, and its people would perish. And that’s what’s happening to our society today, although it may not be apparent to us because of the time scale. After the experimenters finish their deadly work, it may take a society 200 years to disintegrate completely and sink out of sight. That’s not long from a historical viewpoint, but it’s long enough so that most of the people involved never realize what’s happening to them.

The society we had in Europe up until the end of the 18th century — or one may say, the various national societies there, which really were very much alike when compared with any non-European society — this European society had evolved over a period of many, many generations of our people, and it had fine-tuned itself to our special nature; it had developed its institutions and its ways of doing things which suited us as a people and allowed us to form viable, efficient communities. And when we colonized North America and other parts of the world, we brought the essential elements of our society with us.

And what were those essential elements?

The first essential element was order. Everyone had a place in our society, whether he was the village blacksmith or the king, and he knew what that place was. He knew how he fitted in, what his responsibilities were, to whom he owed loyalty and respect, and to whom he in turn was obliged to provide guidance. It was a hierarchical society. There was no pretense that everyone was just as capable or just as creative or just as brave or just as suited for leadership as anyone else. People had social rank and social status and social authority commensurate with their social responsibilities and with their contributions to society.

The second essential feature that our society had was homogeneity. Everyone had the same roots, the same history, the same genes, the same sensibilities. Or at least, there was enough genetic similarity, there was a close enough family relationship among the people, so that people understood each other. A village, a province, a nation was like a large, extended family. People felt a sense of kinship, a sense of belonging, a sense of loyalty and responsibility that extended to the whole society. This feeling of belonging, this sense of a common history and a common destiny, this sense of identity, was the glue that held the society together and gave it its strength. And it gave men and women their individual strength too. Just knowing who they were, where they had been, and where they were going made an enormous difference in their sense of personal security, in their ability to plan ahead and be reasonably confident of what the future held for them.

This homogeneity and the consequent sense of family, of identity, was thousands of years in developing, just like the hierarchical order in our society. And we developed, we evolved, along with our society. The type of society we had become imprinted on our genes. Of course, it wasn’t a perfect society. It was full of problems and imperfections. We always were developing new technologies, for example, and our society didn’t always have time to adjust itself to these innovations before even more innovations came along. But it was a society in which we were strong and confident and more or less spiritually healthy.

You know, the opponents of social order and racial homogeneity will try to confuse the issue by pointing out that we have a longer life span today, that our infant mortality rate is much lower, that we don’t have to work as hard to support ourselves, that we can buy all sorts of shiny gadgets that our ancestors couldn’t, and so on. They want you to believe that these changes came about as benefits of the breakdown of order and the destruction of homogeneity. But they didn’t. They are all the results of technological innovation. Our medical scientists learned how to control the diseases which shortened our lives. Our scientists and engineers learned how we could work more efficiently. And they learned how to make new tools and new toys for us.

Now, to be sure, not all of the degenerative changes in our society which have occurred in the past couple of centuries have been the consequence of the destructive efforts of the Jews and the liberals. The Industrial Revolution really was a huge shock to our traditional form of society. The Industrial Revolution took people off the farms and out of the villages and packed them into factory towns like sardines in a can. This was a great strain on the old order. The new relationship between factory owner and factory workers was not as healthy a one as had existed between landowner and workers on the land, nor was the new, urban life-style as spiritually healthy as the village life-style.

Unrest and revolution were fomented from the latter part of the 18th century and throughout the 19th and 20th centuries: egalitarianism, Communism, democracy, equal rights, no responsibilities, welfare programs, feminism. The old order was drowned in blood. In France the aristocrats and the landowners were butchered in response to the resentments which the liberals had stirred up among the rabble. Later in Russia the same process took place, when the Jewish Bolsheviks finally gained the upper hand and butchered not just the aristocrats, but everyone who had worked a little harder and been a little more successful than the rabble. The kulaks, the small farmers and landowners, were murdered en masse, by the millions, in order to “equalize” Russian society and destroy the last traces of the old, hierarchical order.

And into the social chaos of the 20th century the enemies of our people were able to introduce their idea of racial equality alongside their idea of social equality. We were told that the descendants of our slaves are just as good as we are — maybe better — and so they should become our social equals. We should bring them into our schools and neighborhoods, and we should intermarry with them, and we should buy Food Stamps for them with our taxes, and we should give them preference in hiring and promotions. And we should open our borders to all of the non-White wretched refuse of the Third World’s teeming shores. They also are our equals, we are told. The more diversity the better. Diversity is our strength. Et cetera. Et cetera. Blah, blah, blah.

We were too disoriented and confused by the destruction of our social order to resist this poisonous propaganda. And so here we are at the end of the 20th century. There are some people who will try to convince you that things never have been better. We certainly have more equality and less order, more diversity and less homogeneity than ever before. And that obviously suits some people, in addition to the liberals and the Jews who have been pushing for these changes.

Are these changes better for us?

The suicide statistics, the drug statistics, the crime statistics, the divorce statistics, and the mental illness statistics give us part of the answer. The statistics should help us keep our grip on reality when the Jewish media try to persuade us that we need more of the same poison they have been dishing out for so long: more equality, more chaos, more diversity.

And we should be able to look into our own souls for the rest of the answer. We should know that we need again to have an ordered, structured society, in which we all have a place and will be appreciated according to how effectively we fill that place. We should know that we need again to have a homogeneous society, in which we can feel a sense of belonging. We should know that we need a society in which we have a sense of permanence and stability, not chaos and uncertainty. We should know that we need a society in which everyone strives for quality, not for an imaginary equality. We should know that in order to be spiritually healthy again we need a society in which we can feel a sense of rootedness and responsibility, rather than the aimless, wandering, rootless, cosmopolitan, egoism which characterizes American society today.

If we are honest with ourselves we know that we all crave a healthy society again, we need it. But too many of us have let ourselves be persuaded by the enemies of our people that the type of society we need is no longer attainable. Our enemies tell us, “We have destroyed the order in your society. We have made everyone equal, and you dare not try to take that equality away. That would be like trying to take candy away from a child. We have opened the candy store and told all the children that they can have as much as they want, and it’s all free. They all will fight you if you try to change that, if you try to tell them that they must earn their candy.” And our enemies grin in triumph when they see how that demoralizes and discourages so many of us.

And they tell us, “We have destroyed the homogeneity in your society. We have replaced your homogeneity with diversity. We have brought every non-White type on the face of the earth into your midst, we have brought them in by the millions, and we have forced you to mix with them. Now there’s nothing you can do to restore your homogeneity.” And again they grin and say, “What will you do? Will you try to root out every non-White and every mongrel and send them all away or get rid of them? You don’t have the stomach for that. So you’d better just learn to live with all of these non-Whites and mongrels. Pretty soon you’ll be a minority in your own land.” And they gloat.

And it is true, of course, that many of us do not yet have the stomach to do what must be done. And so the suicide rate and the divorce rate and the abortion rate will keep rising. The government will continue building more prisons. The cults will continue thriving. And the Jews and the liberals will keep telling us how wonderful everything is, how things have never been better, how we should appreciate all of the equality and diversity.

But, you know, all the while the number of us who do have the stomach to do what must be done will be growing. Our numbers are growing, because more and more of our people are coming to understand that the only alternative is death: death for our society, death for our children, death for our kind. What the Jews and liberals have done to our society is lethal. It cannot be sustained.

Order and homogeneity, a sense of identity and belonging, are not just luxuries for us. They are essential. Without them our society sickens and dies. The liberals may not be able to understands that, and the Jews, with their media propaganda, try to keep the rest of us from understanding it, but we can see the proof of it all around us. And we are determined to do whatever we must do to have once again a society for our own kind, a society to which we can really belong and feel a sense of responsibility to, a society in which we have a place and are appreciated if we fill that place well, a society based on order and quality and structure and commonality. We will have it. We will do what is necessary.
From Free Speech, May 1997, Volume III, Number 5