Mexican girls of European descent, from Wikipedia.org. Throughout Latin America, there are substantial White populations; Mexico's may be more than 10%, and in some other Latin nations it is a plurality or majority of the population.

by Kevin Alfred Strom

WHILE I WAS in a restaurant the other day with a few friends and their children, I saw another group enter the establishment and take a table nearby. It was a handsome-looking White family, a father and mother with a teenage son and daughter. I was close enough to hear parts of their conversation.

The father was almost a double for a writer I know personally, a rugged-looking brunet of medium height with piercing eyes and ruddy complexion, about 50, with a tall, fine-haired slender blonde wife perhaps ten or twelve years younger. The children were well-behaved, good-looking, and intermediate in appearance to their parents, to whom they bore an obvious family resemblance. They weren’t speaking English.

Mexican girls of European descent

Where were they from? I wondered. Listening a little more closely, I realized they were speaking Spanish. As we left the restaurant, one of the young children in my party decided to try her schoolgirl Spanish on the lady of the family at the other table. The wife was delighted to be greeted in her native tongue and spoke a bit in Spanish with the little girl in our group, then switched to flawless and almost unaccented English to talk to the rest of us. Her husband was a mechanical engineer working on a project in this country, and she was an accomplished pianist and music instructor. Both spoke three languages, French being the third.

I eventually asked where they hailed from. The answer was Mexico, where they were born and where they had lived almost all their lives. They were Mexicans. They were Mexicans of entirely European descent. They were Hispanics. And in those facts there are two lessons.

Chilean presidential candidates, 2005

The first lesson is that using the term “Hispanic” for the Mestizos who are crossing our southern marches is inappropriate. The term Hispanic, strictly speaking, should be used only to refer to people of Iberian descent — like this family. Even as it is it misused today, the word “Hispanic” is racially ambiguous. It can refer to a Spanish-speaking Black — or a totally European person from Spain or from the substantial Spanish-speaking White populations of Latin America. We should prefer racial terms when we’re talking about race. That’s why we should, like Latin Americans themselves, say “Mestizo” when referring to those of mixed European and Amerindian descent, and “Amerindian” or, better yet, a proper tribal or national name when referring to Amerindians. (Often, except when it causes misunderstandings, it’s good to call people what they call themselves. It might be a good thing if the Nation of Aztlan nationalists forged a new name for their people, replacing the broad-brush words “Hispanic” or “Mexican” that have almost no biological meaning. “American,” by the way, is rapidly becoming meaningless too.) Race is what matters. And that brings us to the second lesson illustrated by my restaurant encounter.

A rugby match with a Uruguayan team (in blue) playing a British team

The accomplished and cultured White family from Mexico I met is no more likely than I am to join MS-13 or chop someone’s head off with a machete. This family is not a threat to our culture — in fact, it would not surprise me if they were more imbued with Western culture than 95 per cent. of Americans and Europeans. And this family, most important of all, is not a threat to our gene pool. They are as European as any of us, they are indistinguishable from us, and their offspring could intermarry with ours and our future generations would continue as ever, their destiny undimmed. And all of this would remain true no matter what papers they had or didn’t have in their wallets. It would remain true even if these engineers and piano virtuosi came here illegally. What really matters isn’t laws or papers or even geography. It’s race. It’s genes. And we can never have sane laws or sane immigration policies until we understand that fact.

The anti-immigration “conservatives” on Fox News are always screaming about how they’re “not racists” and how “it’s not about race, it’s about obeying the law.” Well, if it’s about “the law,” what are they going to say when Congress simply legalizes every illegal immigrant? They won’t be able to say a thing. The conservatives are simply wrong. In fact, they’re more than wrong — they’re lying. It is about race.

*  *  *

Based on the American Dissident Voices broadcast of June 5, 2005

What is money, really? What is wealth? And what do ‘economic stimulus’ and war and foreign aid do to our wealth?

by Kevin Alfred Strom

based on the American Dissident Voices broadcast of July 10, 2004

IN 1957, Julian Huxley wrote about the dangers the world might face in 2007. He told of a world wracked by environmental destruction, falling standards of living, the despair and desperation of the hopeless, and a decline in the creative spirit that makes all culture and science possible.

He glimpsed the future in racially-mixed India, where he saw the streets teeming with the homeless in such numbers that one had to pick one’s way carefully along the sidewalks at night to step over the sleeping bodies, wrapped in a few filthy rags and nothing else — hundreds of thousands living their lives, voiding their wastes, and making their hopeless, pathetic yet fecund love right in the open on the pockmarked pavement, and sharing that “home” with dirty, starving, roaming cattle.

One evening he saw a policeman directing traffic at a busy intersection as twilight fell. As the darkness deepened, he saw a man and a cow approach the policeman from opposite directions, curl up at his feet and begin to compose themselves for the night, right there, almost touching him — with the officer taking no notice whatever and continuing with his duties. It was what was ‘normal.’ It was what was expected. It is where we’re headed unless something is done.

“The poor are always with us”

The poor have always been with us, of course — even in pre-1965, 90-plus per cent. White, America. The poor and homeless were mostly White back then, mainly because practically everyone in this country was White back then. We saw poor Whites in the army of the hungry that multiplied in the Depression of the 1930s. We saw them in the abused White men, women, and children of the early Industrial Revolution.

Third World Masses — and Elites

But the grinding, hopeless poverty of the Third World masses is something different — many of them are unemployable in any meaningful sense, many more are willing to live at a marginal subsistence level because the only other choice is nonexistence, and probably the plurality of them are willing to accept a slightly-above marginal subsistence level existence because their imaginations soar no higher, because they are born peons to whom a garbage-culture Burger King/TV/ratty apartment existence is living like royalty compared to what they are used to.

And the elite of the Third World — the ones with the brain power who bid fair to take our high-tech jobs — know they are too good for the garbage consumerist existence. And they also have little desire to assimilate and become like the stupid Americans who opened their borders and gave away their jobs, their food, their land, and their daughters. The elite of the non-White invasion force taking over America has no desire to be transformed by America — they desire an America transformed, an America in which they will constitute a part of the economic elite, all the while remaining, like the Jews, loyal primarily to their own kind and their own overseas and increasingly international nations. These elite Third Worlders are, like Jews, happy to see poor Whites left behind in education and in funding for needed public works. They don’t care about elderly Whites. They don’t care about our heritage, our symbols, and our monuments. They don’t care if our children survive and prosper and inherit an America they can be proud of, the America our forefathers built and fought for. They don’t love our art and our literature and our music they way we do — no one could. Some might want our young people for a little sexual amusement, and many probably welcome White poverty as a way to get cheap workers for the businesses they are building and keeping for themselves and their progeny. These elite Third Worlders are mostly Muslim and Asian and, with the help of the Jewish elite, they are transforming America and the West. Unless something is done, vectors are in place that will make our country and our civilization into a polyracial, polyglot, polycultural nightmare not unlike India — with cynical and corrupt elites in their counting houses and poor, hopeless racially-mixed slaves-in-all-but name swarming and befouling the streets where Poe and Jefferson and Lee once walked.

Too Proud to Beg

And the poor and homeless are White again, in greater and greater numbers. But this time they’re not White by default, because practically everyone is White. No, they’re White because huge numbers of Whites have been abandoned by a System that hates them, that hates their very existence. You see them — Vietnam vets and Korea vets and others — entering their older years with nothing, standing on streetcorners with brown cardboard signs.

You see the ones who are too proud to beg working next to young Mexicans at menial jobs, some deserted by a wife and family they can’t support anymore since their jobs were shipped overseas or given to imported cheap labor right here at home, some ravaged by a so-called ‘family court’ system that tries to destroy White males. The hobos and homeless are White again mainly because of a huge transfer of wealth from working-class Whites to non-Whites, a transfer that will eventually impoverish us and ‘equalize’ most of us to the economic level of the Third World.

Dollars and ‘Paper Dollars’

To understand this transfer of wealth, it is important to understand what wealth is. What is a “dollar”? At one time, it represented a certain guaranteed quantity of silver or gold. There was really no such thing as ‘paper money’ until quite recently. Paper currency until recent decades bore the inscription that it could be ‘redeemed in lawful money,’ which clearly shows it was not considered money itself. What we now call paper money was then properly called banknotes or just notes for short. It was a convenient way of carrying promises to pay money. And making it redeemable in precious metal was supposed to be a way of limiting its issuance, to keep bankers and bureaucrats honest — or at least to put some physical limit on their ability to create money and credit. Of course, there were plenty of ways for bankers and bureaucrats to be dishonest with our currency — to issue too much of it and distribute it to their friends and special interest groups — even with precious metal backing. And tying money to precious metal allowed owners of precious metals, including some Jewish banking families like the Rothschilds, to manipulate the people’s wealth much like George Soros does today. But it did put some brakes on dishonesty and placed some physical limits on fraud schemes, though very imperfect ones.

Eventually, these limits chafed those in government and banking who wished to control and create currency at their whim for whatever purpose and at whatever time they wished, and the ties to precious metals were removed. This gave a much wider scope for theft of the people’s wealth through inflation and periodic deflation or depressions. But note well that I am not saying, like some conservatives do, that gold and silver are wealth and that our currency should be linked to them.

Given proper controls and honorable men — the latter being an insuperable obstacle under the present System, I’m afraid — one could have a totally unbacked paper currency that would retain its value and be a store of wealth for generations that would never diminish in value. But even such a perfectly-functioning honest currency would not be wealth. So what is wealth itself? And what do I mean by a transfer of wealth that is leaving White Americans impoverished?

Minutes and Hours and Years of Our Lives

As the obverse of this 1957 silver certificate clearly shows (click for full size image), until recent years U.S. paper currency clearly indicated on its face that it didn't constitute dollars -- but instead were notes that could be exchanged for dollars.

Wealth is a verbal and often numeric expression for the valuable acts and creations of creative, productive people. The crops that the farmer brings in from the field are wealth. The buildings that the architect designs and the stonemason fashions are wealth. The books that the author writes and the publisher and bookbinder get into the hands of readers and libraries are wealth. The libraries themselves are wealth. A brilliantly-conceived computer program is wealth. The silent machinery that keeps you cool in the summer and warm in the winter is wealth. The mass of technology that connects you to the Internet and allows you to exchange any information with anyone you choose is wealth. The paintings in the National Gallery that move and inspire us are wealth. But currency itself is not wealth, any more than a ruler is height. Currency is just an imperfect means of measuring wealth and of exchanging our creations and efforts with others, allowing each of us to specialize in something –  to our mutual benefit and the promotion of excellence through a division of labor.

There has been a tremendous transfer of wealth from the uniquely creative and productive White peoples of the Earth to the relatively less creative and productive and sometimes parasitic others. This transfer has partly been the result of greedy men, many of them White, who cared only about short-term profits. But it has even more been a result of the purposeful inculcation of a morality in the White West that made us feel guilty for our superiority and caused us to ‘atone’ for it by giving away our marvelous, never-before-seen creations like modern science and medicine, and a thousand other things, to those who could never create them for themselves. And this transfer of wealth, if it is not halted, is going to bring about a tragic crisis for the West, a killing not merely of a goose which lays golden economic eggs, but of an entire race which alone has the potential to reach the stars and take Man on the next step toward his conscious evolution.

When our government gives away 20 billion of our dollars to Israel, that really means that Israel can now demand 20 billion dollars’ worth of work and creativity from us, from the productive White workers and business owners. We must work for them or repudiate the dollars. And, since laws prevent us from repudiating the dollars, we must work for them. Part of our wealth goes to them instead of to our own people. It is lost to our families, to our elderly, to investment in American infrastructure, to our future generations.

The same goes for the endless billions of dollars that have gone to build roads and hospitals and dams and factories in Africa. Never mind that many of those roads are buckled with jungle growth after only a few years, and that the Africans let the factory gears grind to a halt, and the roof has caved in on the hospitals, and the abandoned buildings are now occupied by the occasional baboon. Those dollars were used to demand work and effort and part of the lives of our people. That work and that effort could have stayed at home, could have been used to benefit our own people.

The Good Things

That’s what wealth is. It’s the good things — and the sometimes great things — that we can do with our lives. If our government or the banking system can give away or switch around the trading stamps called dollars so that you are working for Israel or Egypt or China or Zambia or Mexico, then that is how you spend your life. That is what you devote your life to. That is who your creativity and talents benefit. Them. Not your own people. And if we spend our lives working for others, we cannot spend those precious, irreplaceable minutes and hours and years working to benefit our own families, our own nation, our own people. That is what wealth transfer really means.

And it’s not just direct aid to foreign countries that steals our wealth — and therefore our lives — from us. Since the Second World War, huge loans have been made by both private and quasi-public banking institutions to the so-called underdeveloped nations. Many of these loans are ‘guaranteed’ by the government, which means that if the Third World debtors cannot pay back the loan plus interest, guess who does pay? The bank? Of course not. The government? Not really. You pay; the government just handles the involuntary transaction and takes a cut in the process. Naturally, the banking establishment just loves such essentially risk-free ‘investments,’ with you guaranteeing to make good their losses in the Hialeah-like world of Third World debt instruments.

And the cutthroat world of finance capitalism has discovered a way to unearned billions by marking up the products of Chinese and other Third World slave laborers by several hundred per cent. and vending them in K-mart and Wal-mart and the like to those of you who still have jobs. Despite the fact that the corporate giants who throw White people out of work to employ sweatshop Chinese take a huge rake-off from these transactions, the fact is that our trade deficit with the non-White world is staggering and growing more out of control every day. A trade deficit means that, just as in the case with ‘foreign aid’ and giveaway loan programs, huge numbers of dollars are building up in Asian and other coffers, and they will naturally use those dollars to employ Americans to provide them with goods and services — and land. The trade deficit just keeps hitting record after record, and in April it reached another one — $48 billion. Forty-eight billion dollars accumulated by foreigners in that month alone. And the System that misrules America has been letting this go on for decades. How much wealth has been transferred away from our people in this manner? — it approaches the incalculable.

Paper Shuffling

Some will argue that the only use for dollars is to buy American goods and services so therefore all this trade does is help Americans sell goods that American workers are paid to produce. But that’s a facile and deceptive explanation. All those dollars were in America to begin with. Transferring them to Israel or China or wherever doesn’t make them buy any more than they would have otherwise. That’s just paper shuffling that produces nothing. And no matter how you shuffle the paper, services and real physical goods are transferred over there, the lives of our people are being spent in service to the Third World, and they can never get those minutes and years back again.

What’s really happening here is that, in exchange for cheap, ephemeral consumer items — or pretty good tools and autos — all of which we are perfectly capable of making right here in America and the West, Americans now have to honor these dollar claims and work an ever-increasing percentage of their lives providing what these foreign creditors want. And as our workforce darkens and its creativity and productivity drop apace, these foreign creditors will find their dollars are better spent on buying up American land and businesses instead of just buying our products. And do you think a Republican or Democrat regime will do anything to protect Americans as that starts to happen more and more? No, America is for sale and on sale cheap, and almost inconceivable amounts of American wealth are being used to meet the demands of the Third World instead of building up America, repairing our infrastructure, helping our old folks, ensuring an excellent future for our children.

Abuse of the Honest and Trusting

And if you think that all of the transfer of wealth can be measured by trade deficits and loan guarantees and foreign aid or even taxes to support non-Whites here at home, you’re still missing one of the most important parts of what’s happening. One of the ways that the national and international “equalization” schemes of our masters have been funded is by manipulation of the currency — by inflation, by creating more notes in circulation, making each of them worth a little less. Through this means they have transferred wealth in untold quantities from the productive workers and business owners of America — mostly White men and women — to whatever favored nation or minority group was likely to boost the politicians’ careers or gain them favor with the Jewish-controlled media. A dollar that your grandmother saved in 1945 is now worth about nine cents. A dollar your mother saved in 1969 is now worth about 18 cents.

As this chart dramatically shows, those who have held dollar-denominated assets, like cash, or retirement funds, or annuities, have been the victims of tremendous legalized theft.

Those who saved those funds for their families, for their children, for their declining years have had uncounted billions taken from them, largely to fund the pet projects and protected groups and “equality” schemes of the crooked politicians. Multiply that subtle theft by the hundreds of millions of Americans who saved or bought Savings Bonds or believed in the promises of Social Security or otherwise trusted in the value of the dollar and you can see that the magnitude of this theft dwarfs even our mammoth trade deficit or our foreign aid or welfare giveaway programs. What your grandfather thought would be a decent retirement fund — providing, say, $360 a month in 1945 dollars, would require the equivalent of $4000 a month in today’s dollars. But he gets no adjustment for that inflation. The fund still pays that same $360, which means it buys the same amount $33 a month would have bought in 1945. Where’d the other $3640 per month go? Or, if grandpa receives his retirement pay for 20 years, we could put it this way — where did the extra $873,000 go? The answer is simple. It went to fund the projects of the criminals who have run the financial and political system since 1945, and many of their projects are directly aimed at taking wealth and power away from White people. Of course, one can argue that the “smart money” — the “boys” who knew what the inflation game was all about and adjusted their investments accordingly didn’t get hurt so bad, and some even made a dandy profit. But accepting that kind of morality is accepting turning our nation into a giant con game where the “trusting old White duffers” get taken to the cleaners because they believed in America. That’s unacceptable to me, and it should be unacceptable to you.

I’m Not All Right, Jack

“But,” you may say, “our living standards are still pretty high. White people still have it good in this country.” And there’s some truth in what you say. The creativity and productivity of our people is immense — particularly since we largely cast off the shackles of superstition and entered the scientific age, which wouldn’t have existed without us and our unique mentality. And that creativity and productivity have been so great that we have been able — by having two jobs, working harder than ever, and accepting a lower quality of life than we could have had — to keep up appearances while feeding and nurturing a huge slice of the Third World and the parasitic Zionist state to boot. But that situation can’t last forever. As Americans are thrown out of work by the “equalizing” forces of open borders and “free trade,” that bubble will begin to burst. The hobos are White again. As inflation accelerates and prices spike, and Americans find out that those trust funds and bonds have a decimal point one or two places off, and as a darkening America can no longer even compete, much less support other nations, big changes are coming. We need to be organized and ready when those changes come.

A Better Way

Let me leave you with a picture. Imagine that the transfer of wealth away from us and to them had never occurred. Imagine that for every nine cents you have now, you had a dollar. Imagine that all the money wasted on teaching Mohammed and Leroy to play ball and feeding them enough Big Macs to fill Yankee Stadium 1000 times over had never been spent. Imagine that there had been no foreign aid to Israel and no Gulf War 1 or 2. Imagine that all that wealth had been kept instead by the smart, creative, law-abiding, and truly beautiful people who made Western art and science possible. Imagine if it had been invested instead of given away and wasted. Imagine how those investments could have resulted in new scientific knowledge to cure diseases, colonize new worlds, make our defenses impregnable, and make our elders secure in their old age and our children secure in their future. Imagine how rich we’d be — not only in terms of money, but in terms of real wealth, in terms of a better life and a wide-open future for our people. That’s the future we should be trying to build.

The lovely scarlet tanager: one of many songbirds threatened by invaders who induce the birds to care for alien offspring.

The threats to American songbirds dramatically illustrate the dire plight of European-Americans.

by Kevin Alfred Strom

published as part of the American Dissident Voices broadcast of August 10, 2005

ONE OF MY small pleasures in life is bird watching, which gives me some peace in this world of constant conflict.

Over the years, I have discovered that there is a great deal to be learned from our avian neighbors, lessons that illustrate the laws of Nature that apply to us as much as to them.

Recently, a listener sent me this article from the Richmond, Virginia Times-Dispatch entitled “Songbirds in the Midwest are singing cowbird blues — Raising orphaned chicks wipes out foster families”:

‘The Midwest has become a disaster area for migrant songbirds and a paradise for a feathered freeloader who tricks other birds into raising its young.

‘Songbirds that fly thousands of miles from South America to nest in the forests of the Midwest are being pushed toward population collapse by cowbirds that lay eggs in other birds’ nests and force the hosts to feed and nurture cowbird chicks.

‘A study to be published today in the journal Science shows that migrant songbird populations are in steep decline in the Midwest, and naturalist, Scott K. Robinson, of the Illinois Natural History Survey, says that parasitic cowbirds are the principal cause. Robinson said a single cowbird female lays eggs in a dozen songbird nests and then leaves them in the songbirds’ care. “The cowbirds hatch earlier, grow faster and then crowd out the host young,” said Robinson. “The songbird young just starve to death.”

‘Robinson said the cowbirds are thriving in the Midwest because the big woods have been felled for farm fields and pastures, depriving the migrant songbirds of the protection of the deep forests. The songbirds include tanagers, warblers, thrushes, flycatchers, and grosbeaks.

‘A survey by more than 125 researchers and assistants of 5,000 nesting sites in five states found that up to 50 per cent of the songbirds were not successful in raising young. This is not enough to maintain the songbird population at those sites, said Robinson. The survey was done in Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin, Illinois, and Missouri.

‘”These birds don’t have an evolutionary history of dealing with cowbirds,” said Robinson. “They haven’t learned to recognize that a cowbird egg is not their egg and that cowbird young are not their young.”

‘Most migrant songbirds, he said, “imprint on the young and take care of whatever is in the nest,” even if it is a cowbird chick. Some resident birds, however, won’t tolerate the freeloading cowbirds.’

‘”The Baltimore Oriole will puncture a cowbird egg and throw it out,” he said. Robins also reject the cowbird egg. Both robins and orioles are thriving.

‘Robinson said that the study shows that the problem could be corrected by establishing a network of forests no smaller than 20,000 acres. This is the minimum size, he said, to give the migrant songbirds a haven from the cowbirds.’

I’m amazed that the controlled media allowed that article to leave their presses in that form, but there it is. There are so many lessons to be learned there.

Here we have beautiful, brightly colored, noble-looking creatures with sweet poetry and music their art; threatened by ugly brown parasite birds, whose only distinction is that they can sometimes fool the beautiful ones into thinking that there is no difference between them.

Pushy and aggressive: the brown-headed cowbird.

Here we have parasite young crowding out the legitimate young in the nest. Have you seen a big-city classroom recently? Here we have parents spending their precious time and energy feeding and caring for the parasite young. Its parallel is the vast wealth and even lives which are squandered to “uplift” the forever miserable here or overseas. Its parallel is the Christian Children’s Fund and interracial adoptions fostered by our governments and our churches. We are digging our graves with a stupid — extremely stupid — smile on our foolish White faces.

The songbirds are dying as we will die. Some populations have fallen as much as 93% and experts are predicting multiple extinctions across this continent. As the warbler’s trill is replaced by the raucous cowbird squawk, so Vivaldi is eclipsed by killer rap.

What is the solution for the songbirds? What are the only hopes for their survival? One was mentioned in the Times-Dispatch article I quoted. It is the establishment of a habitat for the songbirds, to give the songbirds a “haven from the cowbirds.” The songbirds need — as we also need — and as every species needs to survive, a defendable territory of its own, where its parasites and other enemies are not present, where it can raise its own young, where its own precious and uniquely wonderful and beautiful genetic heritage will be passed on, unmixed, to the next generation. Without our own territory we perish. A nation that declares itself a melting-pot of all races will soon cease to be anything but a graveyard for its people.

Now songbirds could survive the clearing of the forests, if that was all there was to it. They nest reasonably well in meadows and near farmer’s fields. Change of habitat by itself isn’t fatal. What is fatal is that due to the clearing of their traditional forest habitat, they are now forced to share all their territory with cowbirds. In other words, they are being forcibly integrated with cowbirds. It is the integration with cowbirds that is fatal. Give songbirds their own territory, by whatever means, and they will thrive again.

A Discover magazine article last year mentioned another, more controversial solution advocated by some conservationists. In areas where the last remaining songbirds are now threatened, they are capturing and killing the invading cowbirds with poison gas. The results? I quote:

‘Some [songbird] species are in trouble …they’re raising too many baby cowbirds and not enough young of their own. Among the songbirds that have been pushed closer to extinction by cowbirds are the Least Bell’s Vireo of California, the Black-Capped Vireo of Texas, and the Kirtland’s Warbler of Michigan. The situation has forced conservationists into the uncomfortable position of advocating cowbird extermination programs.

‘”While we don’t like killing cowbirds,” says Jane Griffith, a biological consultant, “we do like to hear the songs of endangered species.” On a local level, at least, such programs seem to help. An example is the one that Griffith and her husband, John Griffith, have worked on at Camp Pendleton, a Marine base in Oceanside, California, that is one of the last refuges of the Least Bell’s Vireo. In the early 1980s, half the vireo nests there were parasitized. By 1994, after some 4,800 cowbirds had been trapped and gassed with carbon monoxide, parasitism had declined to 1 percent. More important, the number of male vireos had increased more than fifteenfold, from 27 in 1981 to 420 in 1993. Similar success has been reported by cowbird control program at Fort Hood, Texas, which has become a retreat for the Black-Capped Vireo.’

The outsized cowbird chick uses up food, parental energy, and other resources so that the parents' own chicks often die. As a result of this parasitism, many songbird populations have gone into dangerous declines. The parallels to the misplaced altruism and the percentage decline in European-descended human populations are ominous.

Some bird species, especially orioles and robins, are thriving despite efforts by the cowbirds to parasitize them. They are thriving because they do not welcome the cowbirds to their nests. They are thriving because they defend their territory from invaders. They are thriving because they will puncture the cowbird’s egg and eject it from the nest. The Condor magazine, for August 1995, mentioned another species, Couch’s Kingbird, that has successfully resisted parasitism. What is the successful survival technique of Couch’s Kingbird? — Egg discrimination. Consider that technique’s parallel in human terms. What natural survival technique, when used by us, has been made into a “crime” and into a dirty word by our enemies?

The ability to discriminate — which simply means to choose — sometimes makes the difference between life and death.

There are other amazing parallels between the cowbirds’ parasitism and our dispossession. Since they don’t have the burden of raising their own young, cowbirds reproduce at a much faster rate than other bird species. A single female cowbird can lay as many as 50 eggs in a single breeding season. Since welfare recipients are freed of much of the burden of raising their broods, they also …well, you get the picture. And you also know who carries the burden.

And as we are threatened by multiform parasites, both those already here and those flowing across our southern border, so are the songbirds. Read this excerpt from the Discover magazine article:

‘Meanwhile, a new threat to songbirds has surfaced — an invasion of another species of cowbird. Since 1985 the Shiny Cowbird of South America has been sighted in Florida. According to Alexander Cruz, a biologist at the University of Colorado in Boulder, it hasn’t yet been caught parasitizing nests, but that’s just a matter of time.’

Ladies and gentlemen, please consider this lesson from Nature. For if we as a people continue to violate Nature’s laws, we shall surely perish.

*   *   *

Thanks to the Locust Blog and to America First Books for archiving and republishing this text and preventing its loss.

Sir Charles Galton Darwin (grandson of Charles Darwin), who helped direct the Manhattan Project, saw eugenics as a logical outgrowth of evolutionary science and as the only way to better the human condition.

by Kevin Alfred Strom

I WAS INTRIGUED and then pleased and then astounded as I listened to National Public Radio yesterday morning. As soon as I switched on my Boston Acoustics radio, I heard the resonant, engaging, elegant, and intelligent words of Charles Galton Darwin — Charles Darwin’s grandson and Francis Galton’s godson and a distinguished scientist in his own right — reading a radio essay that he had recorded in 1953. Amazingly, though he openly stated that improvements in the lot of mankind could only be achieved through a eugenic application of the principle of heredity, there was no negative commentary from the “NPR Weekend Edition Sunday” program host, Liane Hansen. The Opponent will at least be writing angry letters over this; so we ought to tell NPR how appreciative we are to hear an alternative point of view amidst the sea of modern equalitarianism.

Charles Galton Darwin had a long scientific career, including being Managing Director of Britain’s National Physical Laboratory before and during World War II, President of the Physical Society from 1941 to 1944, President of the Eugenics Society from 1953 to 1959, and, near the end of his life in the early 1960s, Advisory Editor of the still-published Mankind Quarterly. He was also a major figure in the Manhattan Project. Here’s what he had to say:

‘I RECOGNIZE FULLY that the appeal of things in life will be different for different people, and I can only say what I have found the most important things in life for myself. I count as one of the most important things in the world the understanding of the world.

‘I have spent most of my time working at the physical sciences, and I count myself fortunate in having lived through the heroic age of physics when, what with relativity and the quantum theory, our understanding of the nature of inanimate matter has been as much revolutionized as it was 300 years ago in the days of Newton.

‘This has been the science I have mostly studied, but I have always had a lively interest in biological subjects too, and these have much affected what I believe. Among such subjects one is the question of human nature, and this has colored my view of what will happen to mankind in the future. I believe that a great deal of what is now being attempted for our betterment is doomed to fail, and so I don’t share the particular enthusiasms of many of the would-be benefactors of humanity.

‘It is true that there have been immense improvements in material conditions during the past century, but they are quite external and they leave man’s fundamental nature no better than it was before. So too the intellectual triumphs of recent years don’t signify that man has become any more intelligent than he was in the preceding dark ages. I see no safeguard for us against a relapse into conditions like those exemplified in the sad records of past history.

‘The main hope of bringing about any real betterment in mankind depends on a different thing; it must be based on applying the idea of heredity, a science that is already understood in its principles, though hardly yet in many of its applications. Holding this, I believe intensely in the importance of the family as the continuing unit of human life. When the science of eugenics has been more fully developed, there may be a hope on those lines of really bettering humanity.

‘These are the things that for me are consciously of chief importance. But underlying them, there are others. The great philosopher Kant once said that there were two things that continually filled him with wonder: the starry heavens above him and the moral law within him.

‘Like him I, too, continually wonder at the moral law within me, which dictates my conduct, or perhaps I ought to say the ideals of conduct, which I wish I could fulfill. But I am entirely lacking in the thing which so many people seem to regard as their mainstay in life, a mystical sense of religion. This I lack, and I am perfectly content to be without it.’

Though Charles Galton Darwin devoted a large part of his life to promoting the ideals of a humanity improved by selective reproduction of the best and most fit, he was pessimistic about the prospects for eugenics. When asked what might practically be done in the post-WWII West, he said “very little indeed … for the simple reason that most human beings do not care in the least about the distant future.”

C.G. Darwin's 1953 book, The Next Million Years

As he said in his radio speech, Darwin had little use for the world-improvers whose endless crusade to transfer wealth to the “wretched refuse” of the Earth he saw as not only destructive but pointless and doomed to failure: “…the policy of paying most attention to the inferior types is the most inefficient way possible of achieving perfectibility of the human race… this preoccupation with the weaker members is part of the present menacing trend of political thought which insists on absolute equality.”

C. G. Darwin was no black sheep of the Darwin family in his support of racial betterment. His father (Charles Darwin’s son, the mathematician George Howard Darwin) supported the Eugenics Society, his mother was a member from about 1915, and five of his six aunts and uncles were members too.

He restated the perennial problem of the dysgenic effect of civilized society, implying that the genetic doom entailed by “social democracy” was almost upon us: “…the well-to-do are rather more likely than others to possess hereditary ability … but the more prosperous members of the community are not producing their share of the next generation … The whole thing is a catastrophe which it is now almost too late to prevent …”

Darwin knew that superior men and women might arise from the lower classes, and he was well aware that existing Western societies were far from perfect meritocracies. In fact, he helped to shift the Eugenic Society’s focus from negative eugenics (discouraging the reproduction of the unfit) to positive eugenics (encouraging — through rewards, taxation, and state policies — the reproduction of the best among us).

Nevertheless, he felt that success did very roughly correlate with genetic fitness and that therefore it would be good if ways could be found to encourage the successful to have more children, which surely they could afford more easily than the perversely more fecund lower strata of society. “There is no better rough and ready way of estimating a man’s value than by the amount he is paid,” he said, “… our national organisation ought to be such that the number of children would bear some close positive relation to income.” He advocated what he called “eugenics by taxation” but despaired of its enactment in the age of equality, saying that trying to turn his tax plan into law was probably “hopeless because it would never get votes in a democracy.”

Listen to Charles Galton Darwin’s statement (1953; mp3)

Articles on eugenics

by Kevin Alfred Strom (pictured)

Free Speech magazine, December 1995

AUTHOR’S NOTE: This publication corrects some typographical errors and omissions which have been present since this article’s first appearance on the Internet in the 1990s. I would also add that the term “separatist” has become, in the intervening years, an opprobrious media smear word almost as frightening to two-legged rabbits as “supremacist.” The word “compound,” referring to someone’s rural house or business or intentional community, is another coöpted word which has been given newly-negative implications.  – K.A.S., January 26, 2009

I RECEIVED an electronic mail message a while back accusing me of being a “White supremacist.” I won’t give the name of the person who wrote me with this comment, even though he left the message, including his name, in a public forum on a computer network that can be accessed by anyone. I won’t give his name because he didn’t give me permission to do so. I had left a message on the computer network, asking everyone who read the message to tune into American Dissident Voices, and giving our latest radio schedule.

This fellow wrote back, without so much as a how-do-you-do, and called me a “White supremacist,” and a few other names that I won’t mention. Well, I’m not a White supremacist. But the fact that this person called me one is illustrative of just how much ignorance and malicious misinformation is out there when it comes to racial matters in general and the ADV program in particular.

My dictionary defines “White supremacy” as “The doctrine arising from the belief that the White race is superior to the Negro race and that the latter must therefore be kept in an inferior economic and social position.” To explain a little further, a White supremacist believes that the different races ought to live together in the same society, and that the Whites ought to rule over the other races. I don’t believe in that idea at all.

I believe that each race or ethnic group within a race, which considers itself to be a separate and distinct people with its own distinctive qualities and values and interests, ought to be free to pursue its destiny with perfect independence and freedom. And I am rational enough to see that when different races are forced to live together in the same society, their interests naturally collide and each group will try to get its way. This always results in one group dominating the others. Sometimes the tables will be turned and a group on the bottom will take control and wreak vengeance on their former oppressors.

But whenever people are forced to live in a multiracial society, there is almost always this situation of conflict and/or supremacy. I also note that force is usually necessary to create a multiracial society, since in nations, neighborhoods and school lunchrooms, human beings naturally gravitate to their own kind. This is a behavioral characteristic that is inborn in us and therefore, we must agree, of value.

No matter how many “integration” laws the criminals in Washington pass, this natural tendency to want to live and work among one’s own kind, this self-segregation if you will, continues to confound the bureaucrats. Left-wing intellectuals regularly wring their hands over the supposedly terrible fact that the races in the United States are nearly as separate now as they were in those supposedly bad old days thirty years ago.

I’m not for White supremacy, Black supremacy, Jewish supremacy, or any other kind of supremacy in a multiracial nation. We’ve taken a multiracial road in America, first with slavery, and now, more than ever, with integration. It has been a disaster for everybody. It ripped America apart once, and, if we let it go on too much longer, it will rip it apart again.

If you must choose a label for me, make it Nationalist or Separatist — not supremacist. Since I am a White American and I care about the future of my people — and I dare you to say that there’s anything wrong with that — I suppose you could call me a White Separatist. I find common ground with separatists and nationalists of other races, though, for they are mostly working for the same thing I am working for — the peaceful and voluntary separation of the races, and true independence and freedom for all peoples.

I find more common ground with Black or American Indian nationalists, for example, than I do with White liberals who want to force us all to mix together to fit their unrealistic dream of world government, or with rich White conservatives who want to force White working people to mix with Blacks and Mexicans because cheap labor increases their “bottom line.” I find no common ground with Whites who think like that!

Now, it may be argued that I would have to use force to separate the races and gain for each the independence and freedom that I desire. Well, our American forefathers had to use a bit of force to gain their independence and freedom from King George III; so, I suppose there is some merit in that line of reasoning. But the separatist idea has a lot going for it that I think makes it one of the most peaceful and non-violent ideologies extant. For one thing, as I’ve already said, people naturally form families, extended families, voluntary associations, and yes, nations and governments, with those with whom they feel a kinship, with those of their own race. So if you took away the implied force of all the so-called “integration” laws we have now, people would just continue to do what they have done naturally for many thousands of years, and 90% of the separation of the races would be done automatically, without a law being passed or a shot being fired.

In addition, large numbers of people, of all races, are already on our side, although they often don’t get to hear the separatist point of view because of certain interest groups that work to keep our books out of the libraries and our programs off the air.

The vast majority of decent White and Black people would prefer that their sons and daughters mate and marry among their own kind. I know this from personal experience, and the marriage statistics bear me out. Though the number of interracial unions has, tragically, increased, it is still a tiny fraction of the total despite the largest and most sustained propaganda drive in history promoting it from our pulpits, newsstands, television, Hollywood, and so-called “music videos.”

Since the majority of people want freedom and independence, and prefer to live under their own government and among their own kind, once we can get our separatist message spread far and wide, the situation may evolve to the point where on one side you’ll have the global elitists and their allies in the media and the bureaucracy who promote world government and multiculturalism — and on the other side you’ll have nearly everybody else. That is why the Anti-Defamation League and the other organizations of subversives and traitors in this country are so desperate to keep American Dissident Voices off the air. They realize that more and more people are wising up to their genocidal plans, and they want to plug the hole in their dike of media lies so that no more truth leaks out.

A lot of the people who are wising up to the genocidal nature of the multicultural agenda are Black people, Black nationalists to be exact. Pondering that fact, I am concerned by the realization that my own people have not measured up to other races in this regard. So I think I will confound my critics again by devoting the rest of this essay to describing, not the superiority, but the inferiority of the White race.

The inferiority of the White race is obvious. Now there are many ways in which we are superior, at least by our own standards. We did put a man on the Moon. We did invent the transistor and the computer and virtually every other technological marvel of this age. Our race has produced men like Shakespeare and Socrates, Pythagoras and Poe, Robert E. Lee and Julius Caesar, Michelangelo and William Shockley. These men and the civilizations that we and our kind have built are worthy and admirable. We deserve to survive. I have devoted a good part of my life to saying that.

But as worthy and admirable as our race may be, by our standards, it must be admitted that there is a higher standard. It is the only objective standard. It is Nature’s standard. As one of the greatest minds of this century, Dr. Revilo Oliver, has stated in his book America’s Decline:

“The only objective criterion of superiority, among human races as among all other species, is biological: the strong survive, the weak perish. The superior race of mankind today is the one that will emerge victorious — whether by its technology or by its fecundity — from the proximate struggle for life on an overcrowded planet.”

In other words, if we succeed in surviving the next few centuries, we can objectively be called superior to those races that do not survive. That’s a big “if.”

White Americans are at present markedly inferior to other races in many crucial survival skills. One such skill is the ability to organize and stand up for the interests of our own race. We are all familiar with the NAACP, the Nation of Islam, the Black Caucus, the Urban League, and many other racial organizations working for what they perceive to be the interests of Black people. Those well-known names are just the tip of the iceberg.

I have before me the standard reference work on organizations in the United States, the Encyclopedia of Associations. Under the category of Black organizations, I find some 300 separate listings, including the Black Book Writers Association, the National Association of Black County Officials, the National Association of Black and Minority Chambers of Commerce, the National Association of Black Veterans, National Association of African-American Students of Law, the Emergency Black Survival Fund, the Black United Fund, the Association of Black Women Historians, the National Conference of Black Mayors, the National Black-Owned Broadcasters Association, the Council for a Black Economic Agenda, the National Association of Black Journalists, etc., etc., etc. I could go on for hours.

Now let’s turn to the page which lists Jewish organizations. Numerically, there are far fewer Jews in the United States than Blacks — but in the Encyclopedia of Associations there are at least 600 Jewish organizations listed. We’ve all heard of the biggies — the B’nai B’rith, the American Jewish Committee, the Zionist Organization of America, etc. But have you heard of the other 5 or 6 hundred? The Jewish Committee on International Affairs, the Jewish Student Press Service, the Coordinating Body of Jewish Organizations, the Jewish Documentation Center, the Association of Jewish Campus Professionals, Association of Jewish Book Publishers, and on and on and on and on . . . .

Now far be it from me to criticize Black or Jewish people for organizing themselves. It is natural and logical for them to do so.

But ask yourselves this question: Do White people have comparable organizations to these, standing up for White American interests? Clearly, we do not. There is no White Press Council, no White Broadcasters Association, no Miss White America beauty contest, etc. If there were, can you imagine the stink that would be raised in the controlled media? In regard to having the will to organize for their own self-interest, White Americans are clearly inferior.

In defense of White Americans, it might be stated that there are some signs of hope. Two such hopeful signs are the organizations producing the ADV radio program and the Free Speech newsletter, and this Web site. It might also be stated that the criminal politicians and the controlled media do everything they can to suppress any effort at White American self-determination. But there is no excuse, really. The existing organizations for White Americans would have to be 10,000 times as large to be comparable to non-White organizations. And they aren’t. American Whites have proven themselves inferior in this crucial survival skill.

Another area of White American inferiority is our gullibility, which at times approaches the supernatural. We seem to have willingly suspended our critical faculties, and believe almost everything we are told.

Here’s one small example from recent history: I was listening to Tom Brokaw pontificate on NBC-TV a while back, and he said that Nelson Mandela was the first Black ruler of South Africa in over 300 years. Now that isn’t true. The truth is that Nelson Mandela is the first Black to rule South Africa ever. Anyone who cares to research the history of South Africa will find it recorded that the White pioneers of that land did not encounter Black tribes until they had pushed to their northern frontiers. Prior to the White settlement there was no nation of South Africa. After the White South Africans had built a civilization there, millions of Blacks willingly immigrated there because of the economic opportunities.

Now the White South Africans have proved their inferiority by abandoning their fair and reasonable program of setting aside separate territories for the various White and Black peoples of that region, called apartheid, and by acquiescing in the turnover of their entire nation to the Communist ANC.

When the controlled media told Americans over the last 30 years right up to today — that Nelson Mandela is a saint, a fighter for human rights and democracy in South Africa — the gullible Americans believed it. This is the same Nelson Mandela who authored the essay “How to be a Good Communist,” the same Nelson Mandela who regularly speaks before huge hammer-and-sickle Communist banners, witnessed by thousands. They tell you that Nelson Mandela is a demigod and a friend of Black people, and they tell you that I am a White supremacist. Well, I have never harmed a hair on the head of a single Black person, yet the controlled media would have you revile me as a so-called “hatemonger.” Whereas Nelson Mandela’s ANC, as has been extensively documented, has killed tens of thousands of Black people in South Africa, because they wouldn’t submit to Communist domination.

One of the main techniques used by the Communist ANC to discipline recalcitrant Blacks is called “necklacing.” In case you don’t know what necklacing is, I will describe it for you. Usually the tendons are cut in the victim’s arms and legs, so that he cannot flee or remove his “necklace.” The necklace is an old tire which has been soaked in gasoline, which is placed over the victim’s head and set on fire. Anyone unfortunate enough to witness a tire fire knows that tires burn slowly and are almost impossible to extinguish. The burning rubber slowly boils and bubbles its way into the victim’s skin. No matter how he rolls or struggles, nothing he does will put out the fire which is literally consuming him. He will die a prolonged and extremely painful death.

Multiply this picture in your mind by several tens of thousands, and you will have a realistic picture of just what a great friend of Black people Nelson Mandela really is. The victims of necklacing were almost all Blacks who opposed the Communist ANC. Nelson Mandela’s wife, Winnie Mandela, spoke for the ANC when she said, “With our matches and our necklaces we will liberate this country.”

All of these facts about Mandela and the ANC are in the public record. All of them could be found by anyone who wants to find out for himself. But most White Americans believe whatever they are told. The media masters in New York and Hollywood must laugh at our gullibility, at our belief in their picture of Nelson Mandela which is completely at variance with the facts. “We can make the American swine believe anything,” they must roar.

Regular readers of this magazine well know that Nelson Mandela is just one of many things that the media masters lie about. But the point I am trying to make is that most White Americans are very, very gullible. If you told them in a serious voice that the Martians had landed in New Jersey they would believe you. They won’t or can’t check the facts for themselves, and as long as the beer and the football and the girlie magazines keep coming, they apparently don’t care that their country is being stolen from them. Fifty years of lies from the controlled media, and still they believe, still they trust. These characteristics cannot be regarded as boding well for their future survival. They must be counted as more evidence for White inferiority.

But of course, not all White Americans are inferior.

There are more and more of us who are awakening to the fact that we have been used and lied to by the media and the government for our entire lives. And there are millions who may not have figured out the plan in detail, but who are nevertheless aware that something is seriously wrong in this country, who are just awakening to the fact that we have lost control of our nation and our destiny. It is my job — and it is your job too — to awaken those who can be awakened, to educate those who can be educated, to communicate the facts to those who can think for themselves — because in the next American revolution, they will be the only people who count.

A READER recently wrote: “I share your enthusiasm for Poe, but I do not understand how he is a Cosmotheist.”

I regard Poe as an instinctive, intuitive Cosmotheist thinker, though he did not construct or expound a religion or philosophy based upon his ideas as did William Pierce and others.

Consider Poe’s words from his ‘prose poem’ Eureka, which he held to be one of his most important works, though it is among his most ignored today. Poe makes many errors in Eureka, but few that cannot be excused by the limited scientific knowledge of his day. He didn’t have the facts available to Pierce, Romer, Dawkins, Cattell, or even Shaw and Nietzsche; but he did see far more deeply than most writers of his time. Some of his intuitive insights are astounding.

One of the central ideas of Cosmotheism is that Man’s consciousness is but part of the emerging self-consciousness of the universe. Poe, who also seems to anticipate the idea of entropy in this passage, said:

‘Now the very definition of Attraction implies particularity — the existence of parts, particles, or atoms; for we define it as the tendency of “each atom &c. to every other atom,” &c. according to a certain law. Of course where there are no parts — where there is absolute Unity — where the tendency to oneness is satisfied — there can be no Attraction: — this has been fully shown, and all Philosophy admits it. When, on fulfilment of its purposes, then, Matter shall have returned into its original condition of One — a condition which presupposes the expulsion of the separative ether, whose province and whose capacity are limited to keeping the atoms apart until that great day when, this ether being no longer needed, the overwhelming pressure of the finally collective Attraction shall at length just sufficiently predominate… and expel it: — when, I say, Matter, finally, expelling the Ether, shall have returned into absolute Unity, — it will then (to speak paradoxically for the moment) be Matter without Attraction and without Repulsion — in other words, Matter without Matter — in other words, again, Matter no more. In sinking into Unity, it will sink at once into that Nothingness which, to all Finite Perception, Unity must be — into that Material Nihility from which alone we can conceive it to have been evoked — to have been created by the Volition of God.

‘I repeat then — Let us endeavor to comprehend that the final globe of globes will instantaneously disappear, and that God will remain all in all.

‘But are we here to pause? Not so. On the Universal agglomeration and dissolution, we can readily conceive that a new and perhaps totally different series of conditions may ensue — another creation and irradiation, returning into itself — another action and reaction of the Divine Will. Guiding our imaginations by that omniprevalent law of laws, the law of periodicity, are we not, indeed, more than justified in entertaining a belief — let us say, rather, in indulging a hope — that the processes we have here ventured to contemplate will be renewed forever, and forever, and forever; a novel Universe swelling into existence, and then subsiding into nothingness, at every throb of the Heart Divine?

‘And now — this Heart Divine — what is it? It is our own. Let not the merely seeming irreverence of this idea frighten our souls from that cool exercise of consciousness — from that deep tranquillity of self-inspection — through which alone we can hope to attain the presence of this, the most sublime of truths, and look it leisurely in the face.’

Poe explicitly rejects the idea of an anthropomorphic God, and ridicules the idea of a God with a human-like body:

‘The force which carries a stellar body around its primary they assert to have originated in an impulse given immediately by the finger -– this is the childish phraseology employed -– by the finger of Deity itself. In this view, the planets, fully formed, are conceived to have been hurled from the Divine hand, to a position in the vicinity of the suns, with an impetus mathematically adapted to the masses, or attractive capacities, of the suns themselves. An idea so grossly unphilosophical, although so supinely adopted, could have arisen only from the difficulty of otherwise accounting for the absolutely accurate adaptation, each to each, of two forces so seemingly independent, one of the other, as are the gravitating and tangential.’

Poe refers to God repeatedly as the God of Nature — not of scripture — though he differs from Cosmotheists and Pantheists when he suggests that Nature and God are distinct:

For my part, I have no patience with fantasies at once so timorous, so idle, and so awkward. They belong to the veriest cowardice of thought. That Nature and the God of Nature are distinct, no thinking being can long doubt. By the former we imply merely the laws of the latter.’

However, he posits a universe in which God and the divine stand outside of time (an idea that Savitri Devi was to elaborate) and in which all natural laws and all occurrences within time are connected by a chain of what I would call crystalline inevitability and can one and all be subsumed under the word “Law.”

‘But with the very idea of God, omnipotent, omniscient, we entertain, also, the idea of the infallibility of his laws. With Him there being neither Past nor Future -– with Him all being Now –- do we not insult him in supposing his laws so contrived as not to provide for every possible contingency? -– or, rather, what idea can we have of any possible contingency, except that it is at once a result and a manifestation of his laws? He who, divesting himself of prejudice, shall have the rare courage to think absolutely for himself, cannot fail to arrive, in the end, at the condensation of laws into Law -– cannot fail of reaching the conclusion that each law of Nature is dependent at all points upon all other laws, and that all are but consequences of one primary exercise of the Divine Volition. Such is the principle of the Cosmogony which, with all necessary deference, I here venture to suggest and to maintain.

‘In this view, it will be seen that, dismissing as frivolous, and even impious, the fancy of the tangential force having been imparted to the planets immediately by “the finger of God,” I consider this force as originating in the rotation of the stars: -– this rotation as brought about by the in-rushing of the primary atoms, towards their respective centres of aggregation: –- this in-rushing as the consequence of the law of Gravity: –- this law as but the mode in which is necessarily manifested the tendency of the atoms to return into imparticularity: -– this tendency to return as but the inevitable rëaction of the first and most sublime of Acts -– that act by which a God, selfexisting and alone existing, became all things at once, through dint of his volition, while all things were thus constituted a portion of God.’

And that I would call an early and distinct intimation of Cosmotheism.

Kevin Alfred Strom today

Kevin Alfred Strom is absolutely innocent of any crime against children or anyone else. He has paid a heavy price for his advocacy of self-determination for his people.

by Kevin Alfred Strom

given at Federal District Court, Charlottesville, Virginia on April 21, 2008; with annotations

MY NAME is Kevin Alfred Strom. I have been in solitary confinement for sixteen months. Circumstances and strategic considerations have kept me silent until now. But I have sworn to tell the whole truth, so I ask the court to grant me now perhaps one minute for every month I have been imprisoned.

All along I’ve told the truth to everyone — investigators, family members, this court, my closest friends — about this case, even when that truth was embarrassing to me or easily misconstrued to be used against me.

Let me tell you a little about my background. For some 20 years, I worked as a broadcast engineer. For three years, until I moved to Virginia in 2001, I was the local chapter leader of the Family Support Network, a parenting group. I’m a writer, a publisher, an editor, a broadcaster — and an activist for social change who’s taken on some powerful interest groups, armed only with a microphone and a pen. But more than anything else, I’m a father.

The greatest title of honor I’ve ever been given is “Daddy.”

My Children

My son Oliver[1] is fifteen, an honor student just embarking on his high school years and all the changes that implies.

My daughter Vita is eleven, also an honor student and getting set to graduate to middle school.

My younger son Alfred is thirteen and severely autistic. He has made some progress at a special school for autistic children, but in many ways he lives in his own inner world. Victims of autism have trouble relating to people, but often get very attached to one person in their lives. In Alfred’s case, that person is me.

[1] (All minors named here have been given alternate names to protect their identities.)

Some years ago, I lived in Virginia while my ex-wife, the children’s mother, lived in Minnesota. I had to bear all the driving duties and all the costs to maintain my parenting time under joint custody. My parenting time was split into four periods every year.

My children and I

I drove 1,250 miles to pick up the children, another 1,250 miles back home for my time with them, another 1,250 miles to drop them off, and then 1,250 miles back home again. And that’s for one trip. Depending on school or other schedules, sometimes the driving time was longer than the time at home with them. I was making that trip between here and Minnesota sixteen times a year. I did that for six years. It was worth every bit of effort. I love my children more than my own soul.

Your honor, I am not a pedophile. I am the farthest thing imaginable from a sexual pervert of any kind. I am in fact the precise opposite of the way I have been characterized in this case. And I have never sought out, purchased, enjoyed, or wanted child pornography of any kind.

Those who would in reality or fantasy violate the innocence of a child disgust me. They are monsters, aberrations, contra naturam, from whom the innocent need to be protected.

I am not a hateful person, your honor, but I do revile the foul deeds of pedophiles and child pornographers. In my public and private life I have exposed and condemned them, and opposed the “normalization” of pedophilia now being pushed in some psychological circles.

Sex and Love

I regard human sexuality not as a casual pleasure, nor as something dirty, but rather as something sacred, something holy. It is the means by which new souls are brought into the universe. This love of our hearts and our bodies connects us to — actually physically connects us to — the mysterious beginnings of all life, and to our as yet unknown destiny. It is not to be spoken of lightly.

To me, sex, love, and family form a kind of natural trinity which ought never to be sundered. I have long instinctively felt this way.

I believe in love. In my sexual life, I have been what one of my friends calls “an absolute straight arrow.” In high school, some called me a “Puritan” because I refused to participate in the alcohol, recreational drugs, and recreational sex which were and are so common. And I’ve remained true to my principles.

When the fates have blessed me with a sweetheart, I have always been faithful to her, always and absolutely. I have loved imperfectly and made innumerable mistakes, but I have loved with all my heart. And the number of sweethearts I have had in 51 years of life can be counted on the fingers of one hand.

Art and Beauty

Your honor, before it was all taken from me, my home was filled with fine art: reproductions of the paintings of Maxfield Parrish, John William Waterhouse, William Bouguereau; the sculptures of Rodin, Houdon, St. Gaudens, Hiram Powers; and many others. I’m also a photographer and a graphic artist myself in my role as editor. And I operate a highly regarded online art gallery.

Cupid and Psyche - an example of the art collected and displayed by Kevin Alfred Strom

I believe one of the greatest purposes of high art is to depict the human form as an ideal of beauty and nobility. I believe that one of the greatest tragedies of modern art is that it has abandoned the Classical reverence for our natural form which, our ancestors believed and so do I, partakes of the Divine.

I believe that whenever the human body is portrayed, that portrayal should embody respect, nobility, beauty, and dignity — never crudity, lasciviousness, or degradation; even, or perhaps especially, when the erotic is part of that portrayal.

I do not like pornography. When in my life I have sought out the erotic, I have never sought the gross, the crude, the pornographic.

I’d like to live in a society in which no one wanted pornography of any kind. And I firmly believe that a revival of the Classical nude in art, in the exquisite tradition that culminated near the end of the 19th century, would go a very long way toward making all kinds of pornography disappear.

How then did I come here before you?

The Erotic and the Pornographic

Now, I have enjoyed erotic — but not pornographic — photography depicting beautiful young women. And my imprecisely-chosen words and speculations[2] about those pictures have been used against me. But the erotic photographs I actually sought out, on sites like BodyInMind.com, have nothing to do with these charges — except to the extent that my honest discussion of enjoying pictures of “beautiful young girls” (all of them on sites where the models are certified to be over eighteen) and words to that effect have been edited and twisted beyond recognition in order to incriminate me.

[2] (Speculations encouraged by cynical JTTF interrogators and a vengeful ex-spouse who surreptitiously recorded a marriage counseling session, both of whom later edited the recordings to remove the relevant context.)

In the presentencing report you will note that the number of images involved in this “crime” is fewer than ten. I was not even allowed to see these images, and then only briefly, until I was escorted to the FBI evidence room on August 22, 2007, in the eighth month of my imprisonment. At that time I and my lead attorney were able to view the files along with their associated metadata, showing size, date of last modification, and source, among other things.[3] Some of them are on my hard drive as a result of my actions and some are not. They break down as follows:

[3] (Except for one file downloaded and saved by my wife, which was an artistic photograph of a young woman wearing an angel costume which by no stretch of the imagination could be called pornographic, I had never seen any of these images before that date. They had all been deleted by me unseen when a picture forum was spammed, or were just unwanted and never-saved garbage from popup ads or spam, and were “recovered” by FBI/JTTF technicians.)

Only one of the charged files is even saved to the hard drive. All the others were deleted or never saved and no one (except a forensic investigator) could ever view them.

That one saved file was not saved by me. It was saved on a portion of the hard drive reserved for backups made automatically of my wife Elisha’s computer, and the file’s metadata confirm that it was in fact downloaded originally by her.

Responsibility

More than half of the remaining charged files have “last modified” dates after July 14, 2006 — the day I left my home to save my life and my children’s lives from Elisha’s violence. I never had access to that computer again after that date. I do not know exactly what was done to download or alter those files after that July 14, but one thing is sure: whoever did so was not I.[4]

By studying the metadata, I was able to determine that I was responsible for the presence of the tiny number of remaining files. Their source data shows that they came from an online forum I remember visiting several years ago. It’s a photography forum devoted to beautiful portraits, having nothing to do with sex or even nudity. Many wonderful, creative photos have been posted there. In fact, the rules of the forum prohibit the posting of any kind of pornography there. But, practically speaking, anyone can post anything there — and it will stay there until a moderator gets around to removing it.

[4] (It’s worth noting that only two or three of the charged files are in fact child pornography, and many are not even pornography at all. One was obviously a banner ad for an adult porn site, disgusting but not illegal, which prosecutors doubtlessly included because of the revolting and lurid text (“Teen Rape!”) plastered across the ad, which they falsely characterized as the “file name” in the indictment. The real file name was numeric and would not have made the desired impression on the public or the members of the grand jury.)

The last time I visited the forum it was flooded with spam promoting commercial pornography sites, with “sample” images some of which showed models that were children. Though the spammers used various tricks to evade the letter of the law (by blurring out genitals, for example), these pictures nevertheless were by turns sleazy, disgusting, and tragic. After seeing the first few images of the many in the group, I deleted them all, mostly sight unseen. Every image, of course, even the ones I never saw, left its trace on the hard drive. I never returned to the forum again. These files I “possessed” I possessed unwillingly.

Faith in God - an example of the art collected and displayed by Kevin Alfred Strom

Wanted and Unwanted; Beauty and Ugliness

To get a realistic picture of this affair, you must also comprehend the scale involved. I am a heavy user of computer images, both professionally and personally. There are more than 40,000 image files on my computer related to my journalism work alone. There are tens of thousands of family and Nature photographs — it’s nothing for me to take 100 in a single day — and thousands of fine art scans and images, book illustrations, and much more. I would estimate that the number of image files on that computer at more than 100,000; so many that I had to add several additional hard drives to the system.

Clearly, your honor, I know how to seek out, collect, and save huge numbers of the images I’m really interested in.

Our lawmakers included something called the Affirmative Defense in the child pornography statutes. It states that if the files in question are deleted, and there are three or fewer, there can be no prosecution.[5] It’s designed to protect inadvertent possessors from prosecution, prison time, and the false characterization of being labeled a “sex offender” for life. But prosecutors, even in the flimsiest cases, can just inflate the number of charged files to over three even if the files don’t meet the criteria, and thereby evade the intent of the Affirmative Defense. And in these days of high speed Internet connections and Web sites that commonly have 50 or hundreds of images on their opening pages, each of which leaves its traces on your hard drive instantly, before it is even seen — and even if it isn’t seen — I venture to suggest that the Affirmative Defense no longer applies to anyone, even the most inadvertent. Its intent was, clearly, to apply in cases precisely like this one.

[5] (There are many cases on the record in which prosecutors refused to prosecute even when thousands of the most horrifying and abusive pornographic images of children were found on someone’s computer — refused for the simple and quite valid reason that the person in question did not have exclusive access to said computer. I never had exclusive access to the computer in question in my case, and had no access whatever to it after July 14, 2006. I leave it to the reader to decide why I was treated differently.)

The Essential Element in the Case

In my work as a writer and publisher, I have taken on controversial issues — foreign adventurism by the Bush administration, abuse of the fundamental rights of European-Americans, and many more — and made powerful enemies in high places. I have been a strong critic of the loss of our liberties and the rise of the security/surveillance state since 9/11.

In particular, I have published and written dozens of exposés of the illegitimate and politically-motivated acts of the so-called “Joint Terrorism Task Force,” or JTTF, now operating within the U.S. Justice Department.

In early 2004, in my role as journalist, I was covering a court hearing in Atlanta in which the JTTF was involved in persecuting an innocent patriot named Chester Doles. After the hearing I was approached by JTTF Special Agent Joe Thompson, who, interestingly, knew me though I did not know him. Thompson threatened me, saying loudly enough for the entire room to hear (and pointing directly at me): “Strom, you’re next!”[6]

The JTTF even intervened in an attempt — successful, so far — to prevent me from getting redress in the Greene County courts for the theft of virtually all of my possessions by my wife Elisha and for her violent attacks upon me.

[6] (The article I wrote at the time is widely available on the Internet (such as at http://tinyurl.com/strom-jttf) and includes a description of the threat by Thompson. It was published more than two years before my current case began.)

When this case began, who was it who raided my home with a SWAT-like team of armored thugs and terrorized my family? Was it the FBI’s Crimes Against Children unit? — or another agency devoted to protecting children? No indeed. It was the Joint Terrorism Task Force.[7]

[7]( It is worthwhile to consider that, according to FBI spokesmen quoted recently in USA Today and the Washington Post (see http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-02-07-child-porn-computers_n.htm and http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-04-15-childporn-side_n.htm), there are more than 624,000 active traders and producers of child pornography in the United States who have been conclusively identified by their Internet addresses and IDs — more than 17,000 are in Virginia alone. And these figures are based on a study of only one of the many file-sharing networks in use today. If cases reaching the press are any indication, these are largely people with thousands or tens of thousands of the most horrifying images imaginable, many of which graphically depict violent abuse of little children, even toddlers and infants. One investigator stated he had to go to counseling after seeing some of these pictures. Law enforcement spokesmen state that they only have the resources to go after a minuscule percentage of such criminals, so they have to concentrate their efforts and only prosecute the very worst offenders. Arnold Bell, head of the FBI’s Innocent Images Unit, said to USA Today: “There aren’t enough cops in the world to pursue every lead, so the FBI focuses on cases in which kids may be located and rescued.” It does appear that a very different set of standards was applied by the JTTF in this case.)

Who was it at the prosecution table, trying to falsely convict me of child sexual abuse and witness tampering when I was totally innocent — when in fact the charges were so ludicrous they were thrown out of court? And who is sitting at the prosecution table today? None other than an agent of the Joint Terrorism Task Force.

A small corner of my home in 1999, before I met Elisha, showing a tiny sample of the possessions taken

Attempted Destruction of a Life

When I left my home to protect myself from my wife’s anger and violence, I took with me only what I could carry under my arms. Elisha refused to allow me to retrieve any of my possessions. She sold them openly, then incinerated what she didn’t keep in a bonfire that burned for two days. I lost everything I owned; a lifetime of books, art, heirlooms, clothes, radio equipment, letters, personal records, mementos, and even my children’s possessions.

In November 2006 I went to the courts in Greene County to obtain redress for that unprecedented theft and for the violence committed against me. But I was prevented from pursuing my cases and in fact found myself charged with serious crimes[8] for doing so. Who was it who showed up at the Greene County courthouse, literally arm-in-arm with Elisha, illegitimately crossing the bar and whispering secretly to the judge and Commonwealth’s Attorney? An agent of the Joint Terrorism Task Force.

[8] (For the “crimes” of filing a lawsuit demanding return of my property, and for talking with a local magistrate about Elisha’s violent attacks on me, I found myself facing federal charges of “witness tampering” and “obstruction of justice” which alone could have netted me 20 years in prison.)

A small part of the radio/studio equipment stolen from me

My troubled and estranged wife Elisha has committed many acts of violence against me. I was an abused spouse. She has threatened to kill me, and I have documentation[9] of those threats. She has used threats and coercion to force me to give her money and property and to sign documents under duress. She is both dangerous and delusional.

[9] (For one example, see documentation of her clearly audible physical aggression, anger, and threats toward me captured when she attacked me during a recording session for my radio program in 2006, downloadable at http://documents.iqradio.org/. The source of her rage in this case was my suggestion that she seek additional help for her anger problem.)

She has accused me of having sexual liaisons with my ex-wife, with professional colleagues, with correspondents from halfway across the continent whom I’ve never met, with two teenage musicians whose work I’ve promoted, with my stepdaughter, with my stepdaughter’s friends, with cashiers at the local grocery store, with neighbors — I literally cannot remember them all. My denials engendered more accusations, more anger, more violence. At Elisha’s hands I’ve suffered innumerable bruises, cuts, including a laceration that sent me to the hospital to get eight stitches, and permanent damage to my vision. My ill-advised attempts to placate and appease her[10] made things even worse.

Report certifying that I am not a pedophile

The Motivation

Let me state for your honor and the record that I have never touched Elisha or any other person in anger in my entire adult life; and let me further state that my behavior and intentions toward all of these girls and women was absolutely proper at all times.

[10] (Including agreeing in writing to see a counselor, an act which has been wildly misinterpreted by the press and others: Though still trying to placate Elisha and prevent her from carrying out her violent and other threats, I changed the wording of the document she demanded I sign to make it clear that I was not admitting to pedophilia or anything of the sort. The counselor was one I was already seeing in order to deal with the horrific situation I found myself in — and I, not being a pedophile, knew that the counselor would if he was honest declare me free of that perversion, as he in fact has done. I am probably the only man within a hundred of miles of Charlottesville who has been officially declared not to be a pedophile. A copy of the counselor’s letter is also available at http://documents.iqradio.org/.)

When I finally stopped acceding to Elisha’s demands for submission, money, and property, she followed through on her threats to make her false allegations public in order to, as she put it, “ruin” me. She told me again and again that, unless I gave her large sums of money, paid for thousands of dollars worth of cosmetic and augmentation surgery for her, and gave her my property including a quitclaim deed to the house — that unless I did what she demanded I would never work in my chosen field again, and that I would be permanently separated from my beloved children, saying of them explicitly “When I get through with you, you’ll never see those f—-ing brats again.”

The Children Spoke the Truth

My stepdaughter and a friend of hers were interviewed by child welfare authorities as a result of Elisha’s false claims, and despite whatever pressures there may have been, they told the truth. I was cleared. Though totally cleared by the local authorities, I still found myself falsely charged and accused by prosecutors and the JTTF with “sexual enticement of a minor,” charges which could have put me in prison for the rest of my natural life, and yet charges so absurd[11] that I made history in this very courtroom when, for the first time in this district, federal charges were thrown out as nonsense on their very face without the defense having to utter a word. The preposterous “witness tampering” charges were also thrown out at the same time.

[11] (The “enticement” included such “criminal” acts as 1) attending the same county fair as a young family friend (though making no contact and totally unaware of the other’s presence), 2) “being seen” driving on a road a half mile from the friend’s home, 3) sending a totally non-sexual and non-romantic birthday card to the family friend, 4) sending a DVD of a G-rated film to the friend’s entire family as a Christmas present (after receiving presents from them earlier), and 5) holding an umbrella for her in a driving rainstorm.)

Violence and Threats

Even after my arrest, Elisha’s violence and threats continued. I continue to fear for my family and myself. Elisha has been leafleting the neighborhoods where my stepfather and family live and work, making lurid and false, yet alarming statements about me — including accusing me of the crimes of which I have been acquitted — which could seriously impact the lives of my family members.

Last May 9th Elisha lashed out with gunfire in a road rage incident, discharging a firearm in a residential neighborhood — a crime. Yet the JTTF came to the rescue, falsely characterizing Elisha as the “victim” in the “witness tampering” case against me, and seizing jurisdiction from the local authorities[12] so the government’s star perjurer would not be prosecuted — as she most certainly would have been otherwise.

Just a few weeks ago, Elisha openly and publicly called for my death in an interview she gave to the press right outside the doors of this courtroom.

[12] (Copies of the police reports on this incident are also available at http://documents.iqradio.org/.)

A Most Telling Fact

And let me clarify one thing, your honor; a very important thing. Elisha, no matter what her jealousies and hatreds may be, knows I am not a pedophile. Just two weeks after the day she claims she confronted me on that issue, October 17, 2005 — the date which figured in my trial and the date her violence sent me to the hospital — Elisha allowed me to take her nine-year-old daughter, by myself and with no other adult present, to pick up my autistic son and take them on a three-day trip to the beach for my son’s eleventh birthday.

And she also allowed me to take her daughter, my stepdaughter, to school and shopping on dozens of unaccompanied trips between that October 17 and the day I fled our home nine months later.

A picture I made for my daughter while in solitary confinement

Your honor, I know that judges have great powers to order dispositions of their cases, and that power has increased of late. Powers may exist which have seldom or never been exercised, and even where there is no power to order, the ability to recommend still exists.

I genuinely fear that Elisha, or those she may incite, may harm me or my family. Please take steps so that such persons may not obtain my street address from any publicly available database. I am not a sex offender in any meaningful sense of that term, nor a felon.

Please order or recommend that upon my release there be no restrictions placed upon me regarding travel with my children or attendance at their classes or school or other events.[13]

[13] (The judge did so order.)

My son and I on a hike in the mountains

Please make my family whole again as soon as possible. In considering my fate, please also consider the fate of the real victims in this case:

My 77-year-old mother and my stepfather who are taking care of my children in my absence; they have been a hero and heroine beyond my capacity to thank them.

My son Oliver, strong and stoic at 15, but also shy and sensitive, who chokes up from the pain sometimes.

My daughter Vita, who is eleven and at the stage of life when she needs her Daddy most. She is so bright, so open-hearted, so innocent, so vulnerable. She does science projects and learns elementary Latin — but still sleeps with a teddy bear. She cries for her Daddy, and I keep telling her I’ll be home as soon as I can.

My autistic son Alfred, who doesn’t understand — isn’t capable of understanding — what has happened to his Dad. He only knows that he hasn’t seen me for a very, very long time. Let me quote from his latest school reports: “His irritability and impatience typically lead to tantrums accompanied by property destruction, self-abuse, and aggression. He seems remorseful once he has calmed down, often crying for his father and repeatedly saying ‘I’m sorry’ and ‘I’m sad.’ There has been an increase in elopement. He often runs to the van[14] and on occasion has put the van in gear. He frequently requests to look at pictures of his father and hear ‘Daddy’s letters.’ …Alfred perseverates about his father daily[15]. He calls out for ‘Daddy’ and asks to call Daddy on the phone. He often reassures himself ‘You’ll see your Daddy again.’ At times he will tantrum and engage in self-abuse.”

[14] (I have a van also, which Alfred loves to ride in.)

[15] (476 days so far.)

Your honor, I know I have spoken longer than is usual in such cases — but this case is anything but usual. I believe that I have now fulfilled my oath to tell the whole truth. I deeply appreciate your listening. Thank you.

*   *   *

The judge expressed himself after my statement, indicating that based on the reports he had read, including the interviews with my stepdaughter and her friend, that he would have preferred me to have pled Not Guilty to all charges. As a loving father, I could not do that: The prosecutor “piled on” charges — six counts for one alleged violation of law. I would have had to be acquitted six times in a row to go home to my children — and the government could lose four or five times in a row and still succeed in imprisoning me for decades if one or two counts “stuck” as they could easily do in a politically- and emotionally-charged case like this one, whatever the facts. The ability to “pile on” charges for one alleged offense is, in my opinion, a crime itself. It gives the government the near-absolute power to intimidate innocent people — especially innocent people with children they love — into pleading guilty to one or two counts. I chose to return to my children this summer instead of decades after they were grown, if ever. That’s the choice I had to make, and I made it.

The judge could have sentenced me to ten years in prison and a $250,000 fine. I was released about four months after my hearing, close to the minimum sentence within his discretion. No fine was imposed.

The time for truth-telling has come, and the world will be hearing from me again.

*   *   *

Further information on this case can be found in the ‘About’ section of this Web site.

In 2009, additional evidence of the characters of the prosecution’s only witness (Elisha Strom) and the lead investigator in the case has come to light, including evidence of an inappropriate relationship between the two of them — and open acknowledgment by the investigator that his “star witness” had lied.

by Kevin Alfred Strom (American Dissident Voices broadcast of January 1, 2006)

A NATION FOUNDED on ideas or religion or on geography alone is an artificial construct. It will die when its founding race is replaced, even if it lives on in name only.

It’s like this: If a criminal kills your German shepherd named Rolf and replaces him with a Siberian hamster, it doesn’t matter if you name the hamster Rolf — it doesn’t matter if you pretend the hamster is Rolf’s pup — it doesn’t matter if the hamster lives in the same house and sleeps in the same bed as Rolf — it doesn’t matter if you teach the hamster to bark like a dog — it doesn’t matter if you apply the same training to the hamster that you did to your German shepherd. The hamster is different genetically from the shepherd and it will therefore never act the same, never have the same potential, and never in any meaningful way be related to, or deserve the name of, the now-dead shepherd.

And that’s a good analogy for what’s happening to America, as White Americans are replaced by Mexicans and other non-Whites while George Bush and his billionaire cronies purr that they can all “become Americans” if they just “believe” in the right things and are “educated” properly.

The “nation as idea” concept leads, ultimately, to death for the people. That’s how it always is in artificial nations based on ideas or religion or geography. All of those things — political ideas, church dogma, lines drawn on a map — have no physical reality whatsoever. They’re just mental constructs; electrical activity in our brains. Nations founded on blood, however — on peoplehood — have the potential to live forever. The gene-patterns from which our life and our ideas and our culture all stem are real. They constitute Life itself. And Life trumps ideas, life trumps the artificial constructs of man every time.

Life demands self-determination and freedom for our people. Self-determination means a territory for our people alone, and a government answerable to our people alone. This is not a hateful idea. A world based on the principle of self-determination would be a world in which there was no room for multiracialism or Jewish supremacism, to be sure. But there would be room for races, many races. Many nationalities. In fact, a world based on self-determination is the best imaginable kind of world for preserving the diverse races and cultures of the Earth in the face of globalism.

Now, don’t misunderstand me. I am not saying we should fight other peoples’ battles and obtain self-determination for them. That’s their affair. We have our hands full right now trying to find a path for freedom and self-determination for our own people. And doubtlessly a world organized along the lines of racial self-determination would still have conflicts.

But endorsing the maxim of self-determination will help us concentrate our fire on the enemies who would take away the freedom of all peoples, and avoid conflicts with others who essentially just want to be left alone. This is the maxim of self-determination which I coined in 1998:

“Every people which considers itself to be a people should, to the maximum extent possible, live under its own government.”

Yes, this maxim applies to Tibetans. It applies to Palestinians. All but the most slopeheaded devotees of Pat Robertson acknowledge that. But most of us have blinders on. We can’t see the most important fact of all: The self-determination maxim applies to White people, too.

So let’s apply it. Since we White Americans are a people who consider ourselves to be a people, it should go like this: “We White Americans should, to the maximum extent possible, live under our own government.” That means we need a government answerable to White Americans alone. It means no Zionist lobby or Zionist bribes or Zionist media pressure. It means no Jesse Jackson racial blackmail. It means no La Raza pressure groups and no Mestizo immigration and no Mestizo vote. It means no “diversity”-driven Jewish or Mestizo or Black appointments to the Supreme Court or the President’s cabinet. It means no Black vote.

Now, is that an anti-Black or anti-Mestizo concept? No, it isn’t. In a rational world, they’d have their own governments and their own territories where they wouldn’t have to accommodate or compromise with White folks — which is something they’re constantly complaining about anyway.

The self-determination maxim applies to other White peoples of the Earth, too. “The British should, to the maximum extent possible, live under their own government.” That means no Pakistani MPs. No Middle Eastern Mosques in London. No Jewish Lords. No Caribbean Blacks taking over whole city wards. No Zionist lobby.

“The Canadians should, to the maximum extent possible, live under their own government.” That means no Chinese takeover of British Columbia and no Jewish control of the legal system.

“The Italians should, to the maximum extent possible, live under their own government.” That means no Africans flooding into Rome anymore, and no more Gypsy gangs preying on White people.

“The Germans should, to the maximum extent possible, live under their own government.” That means no Jewish-dominated occupation government. That means no Turkish “guest workers.” That means no laws making doubting the “Holocaust” story into a crime. That means Ernst Zundel is set free instantly.

“The French should, to the maximum extent possible, live under their own government.” That means no laws making the questioning of Jewish atrocity stories a crime. That means no North Africans burning down Paris.

“The Australians should, to the maximum extent possible, live under their own government.” That means no more “Asianization.” It means a White Australia policy with real teeth in it. And it means no Arabs raping White girls and killing lifeguards.

The current rulers of America fear this idea. Presidential hopeful Senator John McCain, who, by the way, has publicly pledged his loyalty and devotion to Israel, verifies this by saying: “We are a nation of many races… (and) many points of origin. But our one shared faith is the belief that a nation conceived in an idea will prove stronger, more enduring, and better than any nation… made from a common race or culture.” McCain is a prime example of one who has abandoned the American people for the “nation as idea” concept. He hasn’t abandoned the Jewish people to that concept, though. He fully supports the concept of “Israel as a Jewish state,” a programmed phrase that politicians left and right are required to repeat as a mantra in order to receive favorable coverage in the media.

George Bush and John McCain work together to flood America with non-Whites. The British magazine, The Economist, estimates that there are over 1,100,000 invaders coming to the U.S. every year. There are surely dozens of millions here already — in violation of our laws, by the way — who have taken our jobs and who are a direct threat to our people’s survival. McCain and Bush support numerous efforts to give aid and comfort to these invaders, to legalize their presence, and to facilitate an even larger invasion in the future. They’ve proposed, for example, to automatically give citizenship to illegal aliens who say they have been working in our country for three to six years.

What a brilliant scheme that is. McCain and Bush know that even most of the opponents of the immigration invasion have either bought into the “nation as idea” concept — or give lip service to it to avoid being called “racists.” So just legalize the non-White invaders, so they’re no longer illegal. Problem solved.

Can you see now that a kinship-based racial nation is the only solution? Laws are just one form of idea. Like the ideas I discussed earlier, they have no physical reality. They are just electrical activity in our brains translated to spots of ink on paper. Unlike our gene patterns, which are the real basis of nationhood, they can change at the whim of a crooked politician, and often do.

Jewish-American General (and former Presidential candidate) Wesley Clark also believes in the “nation as idea” concept — with a vengeance. He told CNN, as his forces savagely bombed Serbian civilians in 1999, “Let’s not forget what the origin of the problem is. There is no place in modern Europe for ethnically pure states. That’s a 19th century idea and we are trying to transition into the 21st century, and we are going to do it with multi-ethnic states.”

As nationalvanguard.org writer D. Kearney puts it:

Clark, who led operations against Serbia in 1999, openly admitted that his goal was to dismantle what he saw as a dangerously ethnically-exclusive nation…. ‘”Ethnically pure” nation states are indeed a “19th Century idea” — they replaced vast empires which oppressed minority populations. …When Clark says “we are going to do it with multi-ethnic states,” the same sentiments do not apply to Clark’s kinsmen in Israel.’

No indeed! According to Clark and Bush and McCain and all the other operatives of our people’s enemies and hypocritical promoters of the “nation as idea” fraud, an ethnically pure Israel is a good thing, worth fighting and dying for, while an ethically pure White nation, whether it be in America or Europe or Australia, is the ultimate in evil and immorality, and must be opposed at all costs.

We are witness to the takeover of the American government by those who have successfully converted it from an instrument of the American people into an instrument of international Zionism and international capital. Some, mainly on the right, call this world government-in-the-making “the New World Order”; some, mainly on the left, call it “globalism.” Whatever you call it, its goal is to kill blood-based nations and natural racial communities, and it will kill us if we let it. It is a tool of the Jewish supremacists.

The globalists have their disagreements of course; they have their Marxist wing and their finance-capital wing; but they are united in their pursuit of universally multi-ethnic states under phony “democracy” where their media always hold the balance of power; they universally push for an end to national independence and self-determination. They see self-determination (and the related idea of the nation as a biological entity) as an impediment to the free flow of labor and capital to maximize profits, and a stumbling-block to levelling schemes by which they hope to prevent the rise of anyone who opposes their power.

Self-determination and freedom received another blow when the regime in Washington, in cooperation with Communist operatives like “Martin Luther King” changed the fundamental idea of America from a nation of free men of the stock of Europe (the idea held by the founding fathers) to a “nation” composed of anyone who happened to be standing on the correct side of an artificial line drawn on a map.

The criminals in Washington repealed, sometimes even without benefit or pretense of legislation, all the laws which protected the White gene pool in this country — including immigration laws, anti-miscegenation statutes, eugenics laws, and many others.

Biological kinship is the great bond that gives birth to nations, and helps them survive when persecuted by tyrants. By rewriting the definition of “American” so that biological kinship (race) was no longer a factor, the subversives and traitors were able to engineer an invasion of aliens who would facilitate an unending “balance of power” game in which the founding American stock would always lose. They also created and promoted a new moral paradigm in which to defend the survival of the White race is defined as moral “wrong” and advocacy of genocide against Whites by racial mixing is defined as moral “right.” Such a notion would have been considered absolutely spurious and noxious by America’s founding fathers.

A nation composed of a unified people with genetic kinship, a shared history, and one culture is unlikely to be snookered into “world government” or into giving up its hard-won rights. A unified people might coalesce and throw off the oppression called globalism. A “nation” composed of fifteen or fifty different nationalities, as many languages and cultures, and unable to agree on what constitutes right and wrong in even the simplest cases, is unlikely to coalesce into an effective force for any purpose — except maybe self-destruction. Our enemies were smart enough to know that when they began their once-subtle (but no longer subtle) program to bring “diversity” to America.

Our enemies like to claim that a race-based state would be “dictatorial” and “oppressive.” Absurd. A blood-based nation, with its relative lack of social conflict, could thrive under a far more limited government than we endure today. So it is hardly fair to state that advocates of White self-determination are apostles of tyranny. We would decriminalize the right of free association. The last thing we want to do is rule over others. We want all others to rule themselves.

We hope for a new paradigm under which a man has the ability to live in a country of his own people, run by his own people, and for his own people; with full self-determination and independence for that people.

Perhaps there’s even a place for the deluded souls who want to stay with multiracialism. Perhaps they might be allowed their own state where they may continue indulging in their terminal obsession without killing or infecting my children. They could name that place Hell, for all I care. But they absolutely must not interfere with or threaten our people in any way.

Left to themselves, Europeans tend to devise societies relatively congenial to Europeans; Africans to Africans, and so on. The Old America, before she was destroyed by the multiracialists and their employers, was a marvelous nation, and a place congenial to the White men and women who built her — and a fine place to raise White children. But she was far from perfect. Her racial laws and racial consciousness were not explicit enough, not as fundamental and deeply ingrained as they should have been. In the American renaissance we envision, the Constitution and laws and other public institutions must be amended to render the present ongoing genocide of our people absolutely impossible.

Racial disagreements and conflicts and parasitism fill our newspapers from front to back every day, and are the driving force behind much unconstitutional government action. By allowing each race its own government, governmental intrusion into our lives would decrease overall, especially considering the fact that the European race invented and seems particularly skilled at self-government. Non-Whites, with vanishingly small exceptions, have existed in perpetual tyranny. Let them have whatever form of government seems best to them, however intrusive and statist it might seem to us. And let us have our own way.

An excellent first step would be to re-legalize freedom of association in employment, education, neighborhoods, and businesses. Thus would the races peacefully re-segregate themselves, voluntarily, as they do everywhere they still can legally do so today, such as in school lunchrooms. We would call also for an immediate restoration of free speech on racial matters, an end to all Jewish censorship efforts, and the use of all America’s influence and power to obtain the release of thought criminals like Ernst Zundel around the world.

For those who have attempted to submerge our race and nation in their New World Order, we will call for a fair trial.

* * *

RECENTLY, I had to change planes at Philadelphia International Airport on my way back from the Phoenix Eurofest. Philadelphia International Airport is not an attractive place.

I needed to go from my arrival gate to a departure gate in a distant part of the huge complex, so I had to use a shuttle bus. I and a dozen other passengers had an interminable wait for the bus to arrive, while standing in a chairless and filthy room that smelled strongly of cigarettes even though there was a prominent “No Smoking” sign on the wall. My theory is that the place hadn’t been cleaned since the Ford administration. The “diverse” workforce there didn’t look like they had much pride in the place. In fact, they looked like they shared at least one thought with me: They just wanted to get out of there as soon as possible.

Finally, the shuttle bus arrived, discharged its passengers, and we got on. Then there was another wait of about 15 minutes, for no discernible purpose that I could see. I sat with my luggage and looked at my surroundings through the bus’s greasy windows and open doors.

As I sat and waited and inhaled air which smelled like a toxic cocktail of latrine, diesel exhaust, and kerosene, I noticed a remarkable thing. Except for my fellow passengers, I could not see a single living thing at that airport. There were no living birds in the sky, just metal birds. Not a single blade of grass was visible from where I sat. Every square inch of the Earth’s surface that I could see was paved with slovenly-made and lumpy asphalt and painted with faded arcane symbols. All around me, as far as the eye could see in every direction, were angular and ugly “modern” buildings of corroded metal and dirty glass, covering hundreds of acres, doubtlessly larger in area than some small cities. The sky was a shifting haze of different shades of brown and grey, without a trace of blue.

As I realized what I was seeing — or, rather, what I was not seeing — I turned in every direction to try to find an exception, to try and find a single sign of Nature and Life. But I couldn’t. It was a totally artificial, totally dead, world.

And just as I was feeling the bleakness and ugliness and utter totality of this dead world that man had built, just at that very instant, something amazing happened.

A dandelion seed, suspended by its little snow white parachute, floated in through the open door of the bus and landed on my arm. I looked down in amazement at this little answer to my seeking, at this tiny messenger of Life.

And I realized at that moment that this bit of genetic code, this seed, could utterly defeat and obliterate the huge city-sized complex of steel and wire and petroleum and electricity where I was temporarily trapped. The humblest seed has the force of Life within it. Through growth, it has the power to crack any stone and overturn even the strongest artificial foundation that can be built. And it has the power to multiply itself a million times squared and squared again. And it has the power and the patience to ever renew itself, to replace itself — and so to be ever young and strong and growing.

And that airport — and even all of Philadelphia itself or even all of man’s civilization itself — could not prevail against that single seed without the constant application of our efforts to renew what we have built. Turn away but a moment in historical time, and the seed will prevail. The asphalt runways will be ground into dust again by the seed’s trillion offspring in a new green forest whose denizens will never know that they stand on what was once called Philadelphia.

That tiny seed, which did not even span my fingernail, has the power to do all this; it has the power of Life, the greatest power the universe has ever seen.

We too have the power of Life within us. We too can be ever-renewing, ever-young, vital, and expanding. We can build a world incomparably greater than anything which has been seen before. We can defeat the artificial construct of multiracialism. We can defeat the death-world of globalism and the “nation as idea.” We can build a blood-based nation. All Nature cries out that ours is the right way, the natural way. We have the power of Life within us. Our enemies do not. Their path leads to death. Ours leads to renewed Life and immortality for our people.

Life trumps the artificial constructs of man every time. Let us live our lives with that in mind.

TODAY I’VE BEEN READING a book entitled Personal Beauty and Racial Betterment. The book is very rare today. It was published in 1920, during that hopeful time when a strong and mostly-healthy America was awakening to the scientific truths about race and the infinite possibilities of racial progress. Knight Dunlap, the author, was a professor of experimental psychology at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, and a substantial portion of his book was delivered by him as a lecture at Randolph-Macon College, just down the road from me in Lynchburg, Virginia. Despite some faults, the book is insightful and inspiring.

Dunlap, who later went on to head the psychology departments at both Johns Hopkins and UCLA, says much in his book that would get him hooted off the stage by the equalitarian thugs who dominate the academy today. Dunlap’s thesis is that what we call personal beauty is really the emotional appreciation of the many qualities which make an individual a fit and healthy parent for a fit and healthy next generation of our race.

Beauty, then, is more than just something that thrills the lover and the poet — though it is assuredly that.

Dunlap tells us that beauty is “something which… is for the race and for civilization of such profound importance that no other fundamental consideration of human welfare and progress can be divorced from it.”

Beauty is a measure of racial fitness for the future. Men and women ache for it in their mates, even if they do not understand the nature or significance of their ache and their passion. The desire for a beautiful mate is an ineradicable, primordial urge. It is an instinctive part of us. It guides us on our recently-interrupted upward journey to higher intelligence, greater strength and power, and increased consciousness and wisdom.

Dunlap says that the preservation of beauty is inseparable from the preservation of all civilized values and progress. Lose one and you lose the other. And further, Dunlap warns, our civilization is fostering an increase of human ugliness and a withering away of human beauty so drastic that only strenuous and radical changes will suffice to reverse it. This was in 1920, mind you — things have gotten far worse since then.

And so this is the theme of today’s program: beauty and its significance to the race. I shall go a little beyond Dunlap’s subject, which was strictly the beauty of the person, and also discuss the beauty of our surroundings, particularly the beauty of art, which is also withering away in today’s multiracialist society.

Personal Beauty

What is beauty of the person? Dunlap tells us that it varies distinctly from race to race, so that such concepts cannot be accurately compared across racial lines, though he acknowledges that darker races sometimes change their standards when influenced by Whites, and some even come to desire White mates — a phenomenon with which we are all too familiar in our century. Dunlap states:

“The broad flat nose and thick wide lips are often repulsive [to us] because they suggest the African, if for no other reason….

“Among certain African tribes, whose men are uniformly over seven feet tall, and as thin as a rail, a normal Anglo-Saxon is probably not beautiful. Among other African tribes, and certain Islanders of the Pacific, a woman is not considered beautiful unless she reaches a degree and a distribution of fatness which makes her either repulsive or comical to European eyes….

“[But] the type which is highest in value tends to approximate the European type, wherever the European type becomes known. All dark races prefer white skin, and it is a general rule that the female of the inferior race prefers the male of the superior race to the male of her own race, no matter how striking the difference. That the inferior male considers the superior female more beautiful than the female of his own race is indicated everywhere, and clearly demonstrated among the Turks.”

Dunlap is highlighting one danger of multiracialism: the unique racial standards of beauty and sexual attractiveness held by each race can break down when there is prolonged contact. Whether this unnatural attraction for mates of a higher kind is some kind of instinctive longing for what is greater and better, a primitive proclivity to improve one’s stock by mating upward, or whatever, it nevertheless represents a great danger — and no benefit whatever — to the higher race. The danger is particularly acute if many members of the higher race are characterized by out-group altruism and empathy.

What is personal beauty for us? My answer must be very abbreviated and incomplete, but we can trace the outlines.

Personal beauty first consists in the lack of a number of negative characters. It is lack of deformity. It is lack of visible weakness or sickness. It is lack of extreme thinness or obesity. It is lack of a slack-jawed or moronic appearance. It is lack of body or limb size wildly outside the norm. It is the lack of misplaced sexual characteristics — femininity in men is undesirable, as is masculinity in women.

For the woman, stature and strength greater than her own rank high in her estimate of male beauty (as long as the man’s stature is not far beyond the norm) — both signs of a man who can protect and provide. And the most attractive man for the single woman is usually one who is sufficiently young to have years of vigor ahead, so he will still be strong when the couple’s offspring are almost grown — even though his age may be considerably greater than the woman’s in some cases.

For the man, the woman’s body is beautiful which has the harmonious swelling of the hips and breasts so much celebrated in art, and the perfect softness of the skin (which shows not too little nor too much underlying fatty tissue), the glowing complexion, and the vivacity and energy that together show a healthy ability to bear and nurture children. The greatest sexual beauty is found in the woman in her child-bearing years.

And there are a great many characters of beauty which apply to both sexes. In some cases, these marks of beauty are also marks of an advanced race, characteristics which signify the greatest possible difference from more primitive forms.

Facial angle: from Edwin J. Houston, The Elements of Physical Geography, for the use of Schools, Academies, and Colleges

Looking at the profile of the face, we note the facial angle (the angle, relative to the horizon when a man is standing normally, of a line drawn from the greatest protuberance of the jaw to the most prominent part of the forehead). The average facial angle of the European race is the closest to vertical of any human race. We also see that non-human creatures have lower and lower facial angles as we make our way from the more advanced to the more primitive. Less-advanced and smaller-brained creatures (and races) have a lower, more sloping forehead (and hence less capacity in the frontal regions of the brain). More primitive races and creatures also tend to have larger teeth, and larger jaws which jut forward, thus making the facial angle even closer to the horizontal.

The man or woman with a high or ‘noble’ forehead is better-looking to us than a man or woman with a steeply-sloping forehead, which we instinctively view as primitive and ugly, whether we use those words or not. The protruding jaw, so common in Africans and Australasians, or the underdeveloped chin and outsized nose common to some Semites, to European eyes give the human profile a convex and snout-like appearance, and hence are bars to beauty as we perceive it. We may not be conscious of the reason, but our instincts, our souls if you will, are telling us that the highly-evolved is beautiful and the primitive-looking is not.

The facial angle of various primates can be clearly seen in this illustration of cranial capacity: provided courtesy of the Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University

The most primitive human races have rather stiff and kinky hair, and so, to the European, softly curling, waving, or smoothly soft and straight hair are the most beautiful. Again, we instinctively admire the advanced traits and shrink back from the primitive.

Dunlap tells us that the eyes are special beauty marks, though the precise analysis of why or how that is so — why we instinctively feel that the eyes are expressive windows on the soul — is a subject that needs further study:

“Aside from the indication of physical condition which the eyes afford (and every physician makes use of these indications), the importance of the eye is probably largely racial. The blue or the black, the large or the small, are not in themselves of moment, but they indicate stocks from which we expect certain other characters, mental and physical.”

The eyes of the people of our race range from brown to the lightest hues, but I think that in general our race possesses — not exclusively, but more than any other on average — the quality of clarity of the eyes, of whiteness of the orbs when healthy, and of translucency of the iris so that the colored matter is visible clearly through the cornea. This is what gives our eyes an expressive and lucid quality which we see as beautiful.

The cast of the expression of the human face may be the most important single factor in personal beauty. Even in classical art, where the ideal of European beauty is literally set in stone and the entire nude form is revealed, it is still the sublimely high and spiritual expression of the face which arrests our attention more than any other single quality. Dunlap tells us:

“The voluntary muscles of the face, scalp, trunk, arms, and legs are kept in a condition of tonus by nerve currents constantly supplied to them by the motor nerves. Tonus is a state of partial contraction, which constitutes the state of readiness for action of the muscle. If the motor nerve trunk which supplies any voluntary muscle be severed, the muscle at once becomes flabby. …the muscle must be in the appropriate chemical condition to receive the stimulus, and this chemical condition is dependent not only on the general metabolic conditions of nutrition, fatigue, and rest, but also on the specific actions of hormones….”

The face is the site of the most complex muscle structure anywhere on the body, with a complex nerve structure to match, thus giving our faces an extremely wide and subtle variation of expression. With the dependence of these many muscles on the structure, health, and current state of the nerves, it is not surprising that we can learn much of the temperament, state of health, and intelligence of a man or woman by looking at his or her face. The face, and to a lesser extent, the other parts of the body, are giving us a constant and multifaceted ‘readout’ of the brain and nervous system within.

The ‘look’ that we call beauty is partly composed of an harmonious arrangement of these complex muscles, combined with an overall poise of the body — both achievable only in a healthy organism with a healthy nervous system.

Of course, we find that our instinctive ideals of beauty — not only as expressed in our sexual selection, but also in our art when it was uncorrupted and free — far outstrip reality in these regards. Very few of us embody all these ideals anywhere close to perfection, though on average we approach them more closely than any other race. But they are our ideals, and insofar as those ideals are favored in our selection of who will be the mothers and fathers of generations to come, they will indeed be a glimpse of those unborn generations, a glimpse of what will be, a glimpse of the future.

The Death of Beauty

We also find that in modern society, it is the highest and most intelligent and most beautiful who effectively sterilize themselves and have the fewest children. It is the best among us who have the most urgent and difficult career tasks to perform; the least time for children. It is largely the bright and the beautiful who are siphoned off to be used and abused by the ‘entertainment industry’ in their prime parenting years, and who are the most likely to be able to ‘arrange things’ for the consumerist ideal of a life of trinkets, gadgets, indolence, indulgence, and childlessness. To the dull and the dark come the largest families, these days.

We are effectively exterminating the beautiful.

Part of this problem is due to anti-natal propaganda (which has its greatest effects on the intelligent and responsible), to be sure, and the intensive promotion of every kind of sexual activity except the kind that leads to offspring. But much is due to the simple collision of modern reproductive technology with selfishness and laziness and shortsightedness. (When Margaret Sanger promoted birth control in the early part of the last century, she honestly believed it would relieve the misery of the underclass — and simultaneously have a eugenic effect — because the genetically poorly endowed would still be rational enough to see the quality-of-life benefit in having fewer children. She was wildly optimistic. On balance, it is the responsible and intelligent who limit their numbers. The irresponsible and stupid are as profligate as ever. The effect of Sanger’s crusade has been the opposite of what she intended: It has been dysgenic.)

Our social policies — which greatly reward the childless career woman who spends her life, say, overseeing the making of landfill-destined widgets in a Chinese factory, and which also reward the borderline-retarded semi-savage who can increase her tax-money handout by having a seventh child — are also dysgenic in the extreme. The same policies essentially punish the intelligent White woman who has Tommy and Sally and Jenny instead of having a position on the board of the widget company or a corner in the crack house. That has got to stop.

By essentially killing off and sterilizing our best and multiplying our worst, we are killing beauty and killing ourselves. We are doing the exact opposite of what Nature is urging us to do.

Art

Multiracialism also leads directly to the death of beauty in art. Different races have vastly different ideas of beauty. Michelangelo did not produce African masks. Chopin did not write rap or beat on hollow logs. John William Waterhouse and Jackson Pollock inhabited very different inner worlds. In a multiracial society, standards and traditions are abandoned — White standards are too “Eurocentric,” and no group can impose its standards on any other nor even hold on to its own traditions for long. In painting, sculpture, architecture, music, literature, and the decorative arts, there is no center any more. The continuity of thousands of years is broken. There is chaos.

Out of it all, a bland, offensive-to-no-one, make-it-as-cheaply-as-possible artistic ethos invades our lives from every side, coupled with an “avant-garde” which revels in the equally-empty perverse. As we begin to live in a society of ugly people, we also see ugly paintings, ugly advertisements, ugly clothing, ugly body deformations and decorations, and ugly buildings everywhere we look. A people disconnected from its own traditions of beauty, a people inundated with the bland and ugly — mixed in with the weird and trendy and ugly — is sickened and greatly weakened.

As I’ve said before on this program: White children need White art. We need to inculcate a feeling for the highest kind of beauty — our kind of beauty — in our children from the very first day of their lives. In every direction we turn, we should see or hear something beautiful. Most important is the beauty of the human body, European man and woman portrayed in art that exalts and worships, but never degrades.

Beauty Speaks to Us

When romantic love first strikes a man and a woman, beauty speaks loudly: The lovers may consciously think or say, my beloved has beauty, but aeons-old instincts are saying at the same time he is strong and wise and will make a good father; she is bright and fertile and life-giving and will make a good mother. And also they are saying of the loved one that he or she is a fine example of my own kind, a perfect match for me. That is what Nature is telling us with that rush of love and beauty that greets us in our youth.

And Nature is right. We as individuals have lives that are too short for the tasks that Nature is trying to accomplish. Nature needs generations upon generations to reach her goals, the ultimate ends of which even our best minds cannot see, though we know the path leads upward. And so that wisdom, that strength, that vitality, that intelligence, that character — that beauty that our race still possesses — must be carried on from generation to generation, getting stronger, or at least not diminishing, if we are to reach that destiny, if we are not to prove ourselves to be one of Nature’s dead ends who failed to do what must be done to survive. Beauty is Nature’s way of giving us that message on an emotional level.

I believe that for our race to follow that upward path, for us to maintain the strength it will take to endure the trials of competition with other races and the unknown disasters of the future, we must treasure that beauty and increase it every year, every day. We must build a culture of European beauty and splendor so we shall ever have before our eyes and in our ears the beauty that we and only we can create. If we do that, we shall never forget that our primary purpose on Earth is to bring forth the future generations of our uniquely beautiful race.

by Kevin Alfred Strom (American Dissident Voices broadcast for June 4, 2006)

THE EARTH IS REGULARLY struck by objects from space.

Some of these objects are large enough to cause massive destruction, dwarfing that of even a full-scale nuclear war. A few of these events have come agonizingly close to wiping out all life on Earth, and did in fact cause the extinction of thousands of species — including the dominant life forms of those times.

I mention these facts only to give you a single example of why creative intelligence — the kind of intelligence possessed in the highest degree by Western man, and the kind of intelligence we are breeding out of ourselves by importing and mixing with more primitive races — is of such absolutely vital importance.

As recently as 1908 an object from space impacted our world. It exploded over Russian Siberia, coming ominously close to striking the Earth. Even exploding in the air as it did, it flattened 1,200 square miles of forest, with huge old-growth trees — 60 million of them — broken off instantly like matchsticks. Near the center, trees and animals were vaporized or instantly incinerated. This event, called the Tunguska Event, is believed to have been caused by very small asteroid, thought to be a mere 60 yards across. It exploded three to four miles in the air.

The fireball did more than flatten trees. Even though the area was sparsely populated, it damaged buildings and smashed people to the ground hundreds of miles away. Even 300 miles from the center of the event, witnesses reported hearing “deafening bangs” and seeing a huge fiery cloud. Some witnesses described “a column of bluish light, nearly as bright as the Sun.” Dust from the event brightened the night sky in London, England for 48 hours — with enough light to read by, according to some accounts. The New York Times of July 3, 1908 reported “remarkable lights” being “observed in the northern heavens on Tuesday and Wednesday nights.”

The asteroid’s impact with the Earth’s atmosphere alone created a superheated wind that destroyed everything in its path.

Now imagine if the Tunguska Event had happened over New York City or Paris instead of Siberia. Nickolai Vasiliev of the Russian Academy of Sciences, has said that “Had such a cosmic body exploded over Europe instead of the desolate region of Siberia, the number of human victims would have been 500,000 or more, not to mention the ensuing ecological catastrophe. Two years ago an asteroid of probably several hundred yards diameter passed Earth at a distance of only 700,000 kilometers. On an astronomical scale that is very close. The Tunguska episode marks the only event in the history of civilized man when Earth has collided with a truly large celestial object, although innumerable such collisions have occurred in the geological past. And many more are bound to occur.”

Imagine if the asteroid had been 60 miles across instead of 60 yards: three million times the mass of the Tunguska asteroid. Imagine if it had been made of slightly more durable material and had actually struck the Earth.

But we really don’t need to imagine these or even more extreme scenarios. They have actually happened, as recent scientific studies have shown in frightening detail.

It’s only in the last ten years or so that scientists have known that a massive Earth impact from space, probably an asteroid, occurred 65 million years ago, causing the extinction of the dinosaurs and the rise of mammals, which eventually led to human life. Scientists have discovered a huge crater in Mexico which confirms what was once only a tenuous theory. And to clinch it they’ve found heavy concentrations of iridium — an asteroid “signature” — in soil layers dated to that time at sites all over the globe, exactly what one would expect from such a huge blast, which would result in a world-circling cloud of ejected material that would persist for many years, changing the climate to a years-long winter and forever changing the course of life on this planet.

The Chicxulub crater, as it is called, in the Yucatan peninsula was caused by an asteroid estimated to have been 6 miles across.

And just a few days ago, it was announced that a much larger crater has been discovered in Wilkes Land in Antarctica — a crater some 300 miles across, the size of Ohio — which evidently was responsible for an earlier die-off, the Permian-Triassic extinction of 251 million years ago, when almost all animal life on Earth was wiped out, the greatest mass extinction in history. The object which made the Wilkes Land crater is believed to have been some 30 miles across.

There are some 500,000 asteroids with diameters in excess of 1 kilometer — and they are constantly colliding with one another and being sent off into erratic orbits. According to the B612 Foundation, a group of researchers and scientists which includes former astronaut Russell Schweickart as its chairman, Earth is swimming in a virtual “swarm” of Near-Earth Objects (NEOs), any one of which could trigger devastation to Earth in the event of an impact. The goal of the foundation is to develop the means to deflect asteroids into new, non-collision courses.

Schweickart tells us there are several givens: “1) Earth is infrequently hit by asteroids that cross our orbit while circling the sun; 2) The consequences of such impacts range from the equivalent of a 15-megaton explosion to a civilization-ending gigaton event; and 3) For the first time in the history of humankind, we have the technology to prevent such occurrences from happening in the future — if we are properly prepared.”

Now I am not trying to be sensationalistic here and convince you that a major impact will happen tomorrow. No one knows when the next such disaster will strike, and no one knows what its size may be. But I am trying to make an important point.

According to Dr. Christopher Chyba of Princeton University and science writer Robert Britt, Earth’s biosphere is likely “regularly disrupted, every 100 million years or so, by giant impacts that would render human life impossible….”

Chyba added at a news conference at NASA Headquarters, “A biosphere only has a certain amount of time to develop a technical intelligence which is capable of realizing that there is an impact hazard, cataloging that hazard and… avoiding the next impact.”

“Bottom line,” according to Britt: “Only a civilization smart enough to spot the hazard and mitigate it can survive.”

And Earth impacts are just one threat. There are many other scenarios which would potentially leave the Earth unlivable. Shouldn’t we have a backup plan for that possibility, so our genes will survive even if Earth does not? Interstellar space travel may one day be our only option.

According to Geoffery A. Landis, of NASA’s Glenn Research Center, “The Earth itself is not entirely a safe place. It would be a good thing for our survival if we lived on more than one planet.”

Only the intelligence that brought us understanding of our place in the universe can save us when zero hour comes — and I am not just talking about impacts from space. Pandemics, nanotechnology warfare launched by an enemy, climate change and other environmental disasters, and a thousand other potential threats loom in the unknown future. Only the intelligence that brought us Western science can even detect the presence of such threats before it is too late, to say nothing of fighting them. Only the creativity that characterizes Western man can come up with solutions to the kinds of disasters that would forever wipe out lesser creatures.

But the intelligence and creativity that characterize Western man are themselves under threat.

The superstition, promoted by Jewish supremacists, of “racial equality” is leading the nations of the West to literally exterminate themselves through population replacement of their founding race with the teeming masses of the Third World, whose response to a cosmic threat would be a shrug of the shoulders while they concentrate on debauchery, fornication, and mindless violence below the animal level — or who would attribute the disaster to “evil spirits” and attempt to mitigate it with Voodoo chants or Santeria sacrifices for the brief remainder of their miserable lives.

And the peoples of the West themselves, with failing educational institutions and with religions under the thumb of Jewish supremacists and Jewish myths, are increasingly losing their grip on scientific knowledge and on reality itself, as they descend to an understanding the world thousands of years behind the times. Increasingly, instead of seeing the world as it is seen by the best minds of our civilization, our people see it through the lens of a school system that fails to teach them how to find France and Russia on a map, but does teach them about the roots of “hip-hop” and “White racism” — or through the lens of the writings of primitive and wildly ethnocentric non-White desert nomads whose knowledge of the universe was essentially zero.

So we’re dumbing ourselves down with a dysfunctional school system and superstitions which militate against rational thought. And we’re dumbing ourselves down biologically, too, through some of the most tragic results of these superstitions: open borders and racial mixing. We import and mix with tens of millions of Mestizos from Central America with an average IQ of around 80 and almost no geniuses — and we import and mix with Africans with average IQs in the 60s and 70s, the retarded range by our standards, and almost no people who are even moderately bright. And so much of our national wealth and energy and effort is soaked up by dealing with the horrible social costs of having these primitives among us — wasted wealth and energy and effort that one day may make the difference between life and death for us.

Look at how we are allocating our resources.

The B612 Foundation gets no government money. The biggest spender on the study of potential Earth impact objects is NASA — and they spend only 4 million dollars on it in a year: less than one fiftieth of the amount spent on the Iraq War in a single day. The total number of people monitoring Near Earth Objects (most of them amateurs), is, according to Astronomer David Morrison of NASA’s Ames Research Center, equivalent to one or two shifts of employees in a single McDonald’s restaurant.

Compare this with the huge and growing infrastructure devoted to making sure that our rapidly-multiplying underclass is housed and fed and entertained. Compare it with the huge amount of national wealth — and the very lives of intelligent, creative White men and women — which are being thrown away every day securing the borders of conquered Iraq for Israel.

As I said, I mention the subject of inevitable space-borne catastrophe as but a single example of the challenges we will face that will require the best minds that our race can produce for their solution. The next challenge may be different: a new virus ten times more tenacious and deadly than AIDS, a superhurricane that makes Katrina look like an April shower, a doomsday weapon developed by China or Israel that holds all civilization hostage, a sudden change in the Gulf Stream triggering catastrophic climate change with no comet or asteroid needed — who knows what may come? The issue which screams for our attention is not only are we going to be ready when disaster strikes? – but also what are we doing to ourselves? — how are we ourselves changing, and do those changes militate for our survival or against it when zero hour comes?

When that hour comes, will we as a race and as a civilization stand poised with our best minds in control of an advanced technology able to literally change the fate of star systems — so that our genetic patterns will live on and advance forever, whatever the cosmic challenge?

Or will we be mired in the genes of the jungle, ruled — despite the presence of a few high-IQ Whites — by the needs and desires of the primitives among us, and stand helpless holding our TV remotes, our fast food wrappers, our holy books, and our totem sticks — unable to do anything to alter the onrushing death of our world?

The choice is ours, ladies and gentlemen. The choice is ours.

by Kevin Alfred Strom and Jeff Hilton (American Dissident Voices broadcast for April 30, 2006 listen to the broadcast)

BACK IN 1967 a very strange thing happened in a high school history classroom in California. Something amazing. Something that turned the then-emerging “me generation” on its head — and showed us how we could have a real youth revolution, a White youth revolution, instead of the synthetic destruction-of-youth revolution we got instead. Something that was intended to be a “lesson against hate” — but which quickly turned into a demonstration of something quite different indeed.

To tell you about this amazing event, first I’m going to turn the microphone over to long-time public school teacher and National Vanguard writer Dr. Jeff Hilton who will tell us the very compelling story of The Third Wave. Then I’ll return and reveal to you some of the very surprising facts that have come to light since Mr. Hilton recorded his talk. Dr. Hilton begins by telling us that students naturally seek out real leadership, inspiring ideals, true discipline, and rational order — though those are things that they all too seldom receive from our school system today:

‘I’ve come to realize that these kids are really searching for something. They’re searching for order. The potential for this was brought out very very graphically by something called The Third Wave that happened in California’s Cubberly High School. Some of you may have heard about it. There was a TV program about it that essentially said “Oh no, this can’t happen in a liberal high school.” But it did.

‘It happened at Cubberly High School in Palo Alto, California. Remember, this was the height of the “do your own thing” Haight-Ashbury movement — you know, Janis Joplin and that kind of stuff… Big Brother and the Holding Company. That crazy Ken Kesey and the Merry Pranksters were running around with their yellow bus, sipping LSD, and all that “groovy” stuff… the Doors, et cetera.’

‘And a man by the name of Ron Jones was a liberal teacher out there in Palo Alto. They didn’t believe in bells and they didn’t believe in textbooks. But they were talking about “the Holocaust” nonetheless.

‘This was on a Friday afternoon. And Mr. Jones, the teacher, was asked “Well, listen, Mr. Jones, if they really killed six million Jews, why was it that the German people just stood around and did nothing? I mean, they could have seen the trains, they could have seen the smoke, the bones… I mean, they could have seen something. Why didn’t they try to stop it?” And Jones didn’t know. You know, being a good liberal, the lobotomized front part of his brain just shut off when he heard that. He didn’t have an answer.

‘So what he decided to do after he went home that day was to show these kids how easy it is to become a cog in a totalitarian machine. Supposedly, I mean — this was his outlook.

‘On Monday morning he came into his classroom and began his experiment. Remember, these are 10th graders — about 14 years old, probably. All White. All affluent. And all freaky — with the long hair and all the rest of it.

‘He started off by saying, “Now kids, what I’m going to do for the first time is I’m going to lecture.” And they all reacted by saying things like “Lecture? Man, that’s not cool.”

‘So he replied “No, I’m just going to talk to you… about The Beauty of Discipline and Strength Through Discipline.

‘”Now look: Athletes have to work hard, don’t they, in order to run a nine-second hundred? How about a dedicated scientist? You know that scientist has to work really, really hard in order to develop that new idea. How about a ballet dancer perfecting his or her movements?

‘”Listen: I think what we ought to do, as I talk about Strength Through Discipline, is sit properly. Now everybody in this class” — and they were slouched over terribly — “just sit up straight. Now doesn’t that feel better?”

‘He said “Now put your hands out to the front of the desk. Isn’t that more comfortable? Now put your feet flat on the floor, instead of trying to kick your neighbor. Doesn’t that feel better? Can’t you think better? Aren’t you better reposed that way?”

‘And he said “Strength Through Discipline is going to take self training, through control, into the power of the will.”

‘He said “That’s the ultimate triumph that we can have: power through the will.”

‘And he went on to demonstrate that through a simple seating exercise. He had everyone line up against the wall and then quickly return to their seats, in the same position. And everyone kind of liked it. I quote him: “It was strange how quickly the students took to the uniform code of behavior. I began to wonder just how far they could be pushed. Was this display of obedience a momentary game we were all playing, or was it something else? Was the desire for discipline and uniformity a natural need?” — I’ll tell Mr. Jones right now, it is, as a teacher, I can see it –”Was it a societal instinct we hide within our franchise restaurants and TV programming?”

‘So, on the next day, Tuesday, he came in and he said “You know, we can not only gain Strength Through Discipline in ourselves, but we can also gain Strength Through Discipline within our community.” And he talked about Community as a bond between individuals who work and struggle together: It’s raising a barn with your neighbors. It’s feeling you’re a part of something that is beyond yourself. A movement. A team.

‘”And it’s funny, you know,” Mr. Jones said, “but learning became crisp and attentive.” Soon everyone in the class began popping up with answers to questions. The involvement level increased — from a few who had always contributed, to the entire class.

‘He decided on Tuesday to create a class salute. The salute was a cupped hand — now to us in the Midwest, that doesn’t mean anything… it’s like you’re catching a fly ball or something. But on the West Coast, it has a meaning of waves coming into a beach. And these kids were surfer kids. They hung around Redondo Beach and Muscle Beach and Topanga Canyon and places like that.

‘So Jones showed them the salute and he told them that “The Third Wave is always the hardest wave to hit the beach. And that’s the one that the surfers like to catch. The Third Wave. So we’ll be the Third Wave. We’ll be the strongest wave to hit this beach. Waves travel in chains. They go together. We’ll be the third, the strongest, of all the waves.”

‘You know, colored folks have this “hand jive” stuff which they use as a kind of greeting. It breeds community and compatibility for them to go down the street slapping palms and doing whatever they do. So Jones was giving something like that to these White kids in his World History class. They would walk down the halls of their school, giving the Third Wave salute to their other class members. Now they didn’t give that salute to everybody in the school, just the members of their own class.

‘On Wednesday, Jones issued identification cards with The Third Wave on them. He lectured on The Meaning of Action. He said “I explained how discipline and community were meaningless without action. I discussed the beauty of taking full responsibility for one’s actions; of believing so thoroughly in yourself and your community and your family” — and your race, though he didn’t say that — “that you’ll do anything to preserve, protect, or extend that being.”

‘”I stressed how hard work in alliance with others would allow accelerated learning and accomplishment — and it did in the classroom. Performance and academic skills were significantly improved. They were learning more. And they liked it. And they took part in it.”

‘Wednesday night the rabbi called when Jones got home. He said “Mr. Jones, what are you doing to my kids? I’ve had many conversations with parents, and they don’t like this… what is it? …this Third Wave thing. It looks like a Nazi salute.” Jones said, “Now listen, Finkelbaum, I’m just messing with their minds. I’m going to stomp on them. All I’m doing is just showing them how easy it is to become a Fascist.”

‘”Ah, very good Mr. Jones,” the rabbi replied, “It’s a very good example of this Nazi Fascism. Thank you very much.” And he hung up. So he had the rabbi in his pocket.

‘But Jones didn’t know what to do with this. He didn’t understand that he had gotten the groundswell. He had touched a nerve in the Whites. He had explained that you had to have discipline through community; he’d issued the ID cards; performance was significantly improved by Wednesday. And it started to snowball on him.

‘Thursday he talked about pride. He said “Pride is more than banners or salutes. Pride is something no one can take from you. Pride is knowing that you’re the best. And it can’t be destroyed.” I’ll quote him: “In slow, melodic tones I explained that what was behind the Third Wave wasn’t an experiment or classroom activity — it was far more important than that. The Third Wave is a nationwide program” — now remember, he’s telling this to his students — “to find students who are willing to fight for political change in this country. That’s right: This activity we’ve been doing hasn’t been practice for the real thing. It is the real thing. Across the country, teachers like myself have been recruiting and training youth capable of showing pride and action. We can change the destiny of this nation.” He told this to these kids. “We can bring in a new sense of order, community, pride, and action. A new purpose. Everything rests with you and your willingness to take a stand.”

‘And he told that to those kids. A week before, if he’d done that, he would have been booted out of class.

‘On Friday he said “What’s going to happen is we’re going to go to the auditorium, and we’ll meet the national leader. The national leader will be on television. We’ll see him on television and we tell us exactly what to do.” On Friday, there wasn’t a set left in the auditorium. And here’s what happened.

‘Jones made a very big issue out of taking the TV set — it was a portable TV set — and plugging it in to the auditorium’s AV system, and just letting it sit there, turned on but with no signal. He had tuned it between channels, and all you could see was fuzzy snow on the screen. And he just left it there, and closed the kids up in the auditorium.

‘After about five minutes, a girl shrieked out: “There’s no leader!” And she started to cry. And the entire audience started to cry and yell. And they broke up the TV set. They almost, to use the vernacular, trashed the place.

‘What Jones did, I think, was despicable. He played with the most basic thoughts and emotions of these 14- and 15-year-old kids.

‘But we can still take heart at what Jones did at the beginning. Because, believe me, that potential is within most White kids, especially with busing and integration. So that’s the Third Wave.’

In 1972 — that is, five years after the experiment — Jones published one version of these events in an article in The Whole Earth Catalog, which has been reprinted several times. The story’s also been retold, even by Jones himself, in slightly different versions and in different venues. Recent research indicates that the event did indeed happen, though Jones apparently embellished it a bit to make for a better story. The entire movement supposedly blossomed in just five days — which seems a bit farfetched. And some of the embellishments that Jones and colleagues have added in recent years — including “secret police,” trials, and “enforcer gangs” — make the five-day time frame even less likely. Nevertheless, the testimony of students indicate the experiment did take place and — most significantly to us — did result in an astonishing and positive response from the White students organized, disciplined, and inspired to work for the good of their community.

Dr. Hilton, in his talk, was relying for most of his information on one of Jones’s own versions of events. The Third Wave story has even been made into a young adult novel and film. It’s Jones’s main claim to fame, and, I think, its success is only partly due to the compelling story — part also has to be due to the “anti-hate” aspect which the media and the Jewish supremacists find very useful indeed.

(ILLUSTRATION: A promotional picture of Ron Jones. The creator of the Third Wave experiment, Jones has all the aspects of a carnival showman and faker. But, in the process of lying, he stumbled onto something very important.)

Jones, in fact, after being fired from the high school and working for years as a Special Olympics sports coach and PE director, has been in the process of making something of a career out of his decades-old experiment. A recent video blurb blubbers: “…churches, temples and Jewish organizations nationwide have used this video to stimulate discussions on past religious persecutions, and reconcile and heal present displays of racism….”

In the process of self-promotion, Jones has recently told us he’s half-Jewish — “[t]he child of an interfaith marriage.” His official biography states: “Jones whose mother was Jewish, was not raised a Jew. His parents celebrated Christmas, ‘but we went to synagogue whenever the relatives came to town or for weddings and Bar Mitzvahs,’ he said. He credits his Jewish grandmother with influencing his interest in storytelling. ‘What I remember most about Jewish life is the dinner table and listening to her stories.’”

Philosopher Lyle Burkhead gives one possible explanation for Jones’s project: the inculcation of guilt in Whites — and the utilization of preexisting guilt in that task. He explains: “Most people have an uneasy feeling that they are guilty about something, but they aren’t sure what it is. It’s there, but they don’t want to bring it into full consciousness and identify it. Mr. Jones plays on that hidden guilt. That’s what gives the story its energy. He reframes our vague feeling of guilt and tells us we are secretly harboring hostile thoughts about the Jews, and we are in denial about it. There is no way to challenge this, except to acknowledge the feelings we really do feel guilty about, which would involve bringing things into consciousness that we don’t want to think about. So we accept his accusation, and pass it on to our children. Well done, Mr. Jones. Freud would be proud. Not to mention your grandmother.”

Burkhead — who has come to respect the Holocaust revisionists — adds:

‘There are reasons for questioning whether the most notorious part of the Holocaust happened, i.e., the gas chambers. Nevertheless everyone, including the revisionists, acknowledges the obvious fact that the Holocaust, in a general sense, did happen. Jews were rounded up and shipped off to concentration camps, where many of them died…. This is not in dispute.

‘What I do want to dispute is the alleged causal link. If we lead disciplined, purposeful lives, then we are going to end up killing Jews. If we find strength in discipline, strength in community, and strength in action, then we are going to end up killing Jews. If we “share fully in life,” as in the Wave… then we will end up killing Jews. That’s what we are supposed to believe. It’s not true.

‘In fact it’s so obviously absurd that I wonder how anyone could believe it. I also wonder why some people want us to believe it. Why is this so important to them? That’s the real puzzle.

‘Wait a minute… is it possible that I’m missing something here? Is it conceivable that they could be right after all? If we try to establish the Kingdom of God in our minds, and in our communities, then we will inevitably have to fight the Jews…?’

It looks to me like Burkhead and biocentric philosopher Steven Romer should get together, if they haven’t already.

When Ron Jones, the perennial storyteller and admitted hoaxer, tells us that he’s part-Jewish (something he never mentioned when the Wave story originally came out) in almost the same breath as he admits he’s been hired by and squired by (all over the world) several leading Jewish supremacist groups, I have to admit I am skeptical. But it may be true. In the end that doesn’t matter, because the real lesson of The Third Wave isn’t to be found in any “evils of fascism” homily.

The real lesson is that Jones tapped into something that White people need, especially White students in their formative teen years: a sense of community, of unity, of excellence, of peoplehood. Jones gave those children what Pepsi and Giorgio Armani and GQ and MTV can never give them. Even if Jones is a charlatan — even if he’s a one-trick pony working the crumb end of the Jewish supremacist theatre circuit — it doesn’t matter. He stumbled on something important, despite himself. Something that we as a people used to know, but have forgotten in these days of consumerism and racial death. It’s our job as men and women inspired with a vision of a future for White people to give back to our people, especially our young people, the feeling of purpose and of being part of something great, something eternal, that those kids in Jones’s class had for such a short time before he ground their dreams into dirt. We need to do it much better — and we can. We need to do it for real — and we can. And we need to do it on a much larger scale — and we can. Let us begin today.

Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, who supported eugenics

by Kevin Alfred Strom (American Dissident Voices program of August 7, 1993)

THERE ARE DEEP-ROOTED REASONS for the decline of our nation and civilization, reasons which would be operative even if we had not been subverted from within — and these biological reasons have caused the decline and eventual death of many civilizations before ours. But we now have the power to reverse this decline, a power that previous civilizations did not possess.

Let me read to you from an ancient Egyptian document. Perhaps the observations of Ipuwer, a government official during the decline of Egypt’s Old Kingdom, will prove instructive to us late 20th-Century Americans:

“Forsooth, the land is full of foes. A man goeth to plow carrying his shield. [Perhaps this will remind you of our burglar alarms, mace, multiple locks, and flight from the cities that characterize our age.]

“Forsooth, plunderers are everywhere…. The women are barren and there is no conception…. Plague stalketh through the land and blood is everywhere. [Think about childlessness among our most intelligent women, abortion on demand, and the rise of homosexuality and AIDS.]

“Forsooth, squalor is throughout the land. There is none whose clothes are white in these times. [Think of the burgeoning homeless and their shantytowns in our cities, and the poverty and devastation following in the wake of the purposeful deindustrialization of America.]

“Forsooth, men are few. He that layeth his brother in the ground is everywhere….

“Forsooth, great and small say: ‘I wish I were dead.’ Little children say: ‘He ought never to have caused me to live.’ [Think about the high rates of suicide among our TV-hypnotized and purposeless teenagers.]

“Forsooth, men sit in the bushes until the benighted cometh, in order to take from him his load. What is upon him is stolen. He getteth blows of the stick … and is slain wrongfully. [Bring to your mind the drive-by shootings, muggings, and carjackings of our age.]

“Behold, he that had no yoke of oxen, now possesseth droves. He that could not procure himself oxen for ploughing now possesseth herds. Behold, they that possessed beds now lie upon the ground. Behold, they that possessed clothes are now in rags. He that wove nothing for himself now possesseth fine linen.” [This passage reminds me of the billions in unearned wealth looted from American workers and old-line American firms by alien manipulators like Michael Milken and Ivan Boesky and their less-famous kin; who get (I can't say earn) more money in five seconds than the honest working man earns in decades.]

What happened to Egypt’s Old Kingdom is now happening here. And it has happened again and again throughout history. A strong and creative people come into the land, build a magnificent civilization, which blooms brilliantly for a time, like the flowers of May, but then, inevitably, comes October, and the winter, dissolution, and death of that civilization.

Scores of books have been written in an attempt to understand this cycle of birth, growth, decline, and death, which all civilizations seem heir to.

The Police State Solution

One of the least tolerable by-products of our decline is the great increase in crime. Police departments that once had six squad cars now have sixty, yet crime is literally out of control and the decent citizen is not safe on the streets. Probably six hundred squad cars in such communities might suffice to return crime levels to their 1960 levels, but who would want to live in an armed camp with policemen literally on every corner?

Our law enforcement spending is at an all-time high, and the building of prisons is virtually the only growth industry in our depressed economy, yet crime is worse than ever, a thousand times worse than it was even in the memory of your still-under-40 correspondent. We imprison more criminals as a percentage of the population than even the old Soviet Union or South Africa, yet are we now safe on our streets?

And we’ve created a monster with government law enforcers sometimes out of control, as when the BATF and the FBI killed over a hundred innocent people at Mount Carmel in Waco, Texas and on a smaller scale during the siege of Randy Weaver’s home. Do we really want to continue in this direction? Do we really want to live in a country with the citizens disarmed, secret police everywhere, total government surveillance of our lives, and liberty a thing of the past? Where is this path taking us, anyway?

The Eugenic Solution

Other nations have followed that path, the path of increasing force and multiplying laws and public expenditures, and it has never stopped the decline and fall of any nation.

But the civilizations of the past did not have the scientific knowledge of the biological nature of human life which we now possess. Darwin and Mendel and Crick and Watson showed us the processes by which we, along with all other life forms on this planet, have evolved our special characteristics and how we pass them on to our descendants. In those discoveries we now have a key which can break the cycle of decline and death.

This key is called eugenics. Put in its very simplest form, the concept is this: Civilizations decline and fall largely because civilization itself, through its shielding of the less fit, puts an end to the natural selection which caused us to evolve in the first place. The less intelligent and the less fit half of any population almost always have more offspring than the other half. Shielded from the harsh forces of Nature by civilization, these offspring nearly all survive. This process continues for generations, and with each generation the less intelligent, less creative, and less capable become a larger percentage of the population. After a time, the quality of the people themselves declines to the point where they can no longer maintain the civilization their ancestors founded. Then comes the end, either through invasion and conquest by a healthier race, or through the inability of the dumbed-down descendants to plan for the future or deal with a crisis.

In every once-great nation that is now dust and bones, this process took place. It is obviously happening to us right now.

Eugenics, or racial hygiene, says that we can so arrange our society so as to reverse this degenerative process, so that the best elements of our population will have the most children; and so that each succeeding generation will be stronger, healthier, more intelligent, more creative, and better able to solve problems than the one before. A great man once said that there is no substitute for honorable men. Another way of saying that is that there is no substitute for good qualities in our people. If our people lack the necessary qualities, we will not survive, and by the just laws of Nature we should not survive. Eugenics allows us to choose what qualities and characteristics should be passed on to future generations, and which should not be passed on.

We desperately need to find solutions to our social ills. More laws and more prisons aren’t going to solve them. And “restoring the Constitution,” as desirable as that is, isn’t going to solve them either. Only better people can. Only through eugenics can we solve these seemingly intractable problems. Only through eugenics can we achieve the world of beauty, order, knowledge and freedom that we long for. Eugenics is, quite literally, the only answer.

But the existing power structure will do everything possible to hide this truth, because it would mean the end of the Lie of Equality on which that power structure is based.

Evolution Made Man Great

Nature herself practices eugenics. Everyone who is listening to this program, and indeed every living being upon the Earth, is the descendant of a long line of successes. All of your ancestors, even going back to the most dim recesses of time, managed to survive and engender offspring and care for them. But those that didn’t have what it takes to survive and raise up the next generation left no descendants. Their genes did not contribute to your — or anyone else’s — ancestry.

Conditions for our human ancestors before the dawn of civilization were very harsh. We of European descent are literally the children of the ice. It is virtually certain that a great many prehistoric men and women were unable to survive the endless winters of Ice Age Europe. The slothful and the lazy could not survive. The stupid and the thoughtless could not survive. Those unable to master such cerebral functions as planning for the coming winter could not survive. The seriously deformed and the insane surely could not survive. A great winnowing took place. Only those with the right set of characteristics for survival in such harsh conditions were able to pass on their genes.

Now it is a truism that individuals are unequal. In any population, there will be a certain range of abilities and intelligence. Nature adds to this inequality in genetic endowment by occasional mutations, or random changes in the genetic patterns of some individuals. It is also a fact, observable in every human society past and present, that the least able and intelligent half of the population have more children than the more intelligent half. This is true for a number of reasons, among them the fact that the more intelligent a person is, the more likely he is to have many interests and occupations for his time, which take away from his ability and desire to raise a large family. A person of higher intelligence is also less likely to be ruled by his passions, and is more apt to consider carefully the consequences of his sexual impulses. The intelligent are more sensitive to quality of life, and hence are often loathe to bring more children into the world thoughtlessly. Having very high standards for choosing sexual partners can lead to having fewer of them. And knowledge of — and willingness to use — contraceptive measures is notably lacking in the less intelligent today; and I think we can assume that similar factors have operated for many millennia. The less intelligent simply have more babies.

Now, before the advent of civilization, this did not cause a problem, since the less fit were killed off by the ravages of Nature at a greater rate than the more fit. So, slowly, the quality of the population increased — since a greater number of those who survived and successfully reproduced came from the “top half” of the population.

One characteristic that was necessary for the survival of our prehistoric ancestors was altruism, or the willingness to sacrifice our individual desires for the good of the group. Without such social cooperation, our ancestors would have easily succumbed to competing tribes, predators, and severe weather conditions. Our ancestors were selectively bred for many generations for this quality of altruism, which manifests itself in our love for our family, our tribe, our nation, and in our desire to protect these, our loved ones, from all harm.

Eventually, human beings of a higher type emerged, and they began to develop civilizations.

Civilization Plus Altruism Brings Devolution

As the increasing scale and organization of human activity, along with the division of labor, made human action more efficient and effective, man was able to protect himself to a much greater extent from starvation, severe weather, marauding tribes, etc. His inbred spirit of altruism, often elaborated into a religious and moral system, made him extend this protection to nearly all members of society.

But, just as before, and just as now, the less intelligent and the less fit half of the population continued to have more than half of the babies. But, unlike before, under civilized conditions nearly all the babies survived to adulthood, protected by society’s loving and compassionate arms. The stupidest and least responsible elements of the population, those least able to pull their own weight and least able to bring effective solutions to problems, began to contribute a growing percentage to the gene pool of that civilization. The process of devolution, the dumbing-down of the population, had begun.

This process can proceed quite far before it is generally noticed, if it ever is. For even as the general intelligence begins to decline, there are still enough superior people to keep society productive and even creative for a time, and the accumulation of knowledge continues long after the intelligence curve has fallen, and this adds to society’s ability to carry the unproductive along for the ride. By the time the society has obviously begun to decline, the stage at which we find ourselves, the dumbing-down process is far advanced.

In our case, we have exacerbated the problem; by positively rewarding the reproduction of the unfit, through our social welfare system; by penalizing (through taxes and other means) the productive and intelligent for their success, and by devoting a greater and greater percentage of our precious labor and resources to a futile attempt to make the inferior “equal.” We are accelerating the process of genetic decline also by the importation and acceptance of inferior stocks into our gene pool. Many of these things are done in the name of “justice” and “compassion.” But those who promote the pernicious doctrine of “equality” are doing incalculable harm to future generations as they attempt to alleviate the temporary pains of the present.

The Cycle Can Be Broken

How can this cycle be broken? It can only be broken so by so arranging our society so that the normal, and the best and the brightest, among us have the most children, and those unfortunates who cannot or will not pull their own weight, the habitual criminals and the mentally defective, have the least. This would be the essence of true compassion for future generations of our people. This would be the opening of a doorway down an entirely new pathway of progress, beauty, scientific discovery, technological achievement, prosperity, and peace such as has never been seen before on this planet. This would be the greatest gift that we could ever give our children and grandchildren. The gift of a better world. That’s not an empty phrase to us — we really can achieve that. A world of excellence, a world made better by the better men and women who will inhabit it. Because we now have the knowledge to create that world, it is our responsibility to bring it into being.

Kevin Strom, 1956

by Kevin Alfred Strom (American Dissident Voices program of June 19, 1993)

I’M RECORDING this show on the week just before Father’s Day, and this year I’m a father for the first time. Looking at my baby boy and helping my wife care for him have made me think quite a bit about my own life, the world I grew up in, the lessons I learned, and the world my son is going to inherit. I’m going to tell you a little about myself, and how I came to the conclusions and the world-view that I express to you every week on this radio station.

I was born on a Summer morning in 1956, in Anchorage, Territory of Alaska. My parents had moved to Alaska some five years earlier, shortly after they were married, since that was where my father, an Air Force Master Sergeant, was assigned. I was my parent’s first child.

Both my father and mother were of Norwegian descent, hard-working farm kids from Minnesota born during the Depression. They were just three generations removed from their immigrant ancestors. My father’s father, Alfred Strom, in the early part of this century, had cleared his homestead of several hundred acres himself, and built a very substantial two-story house, large barn, and numerous outbuildings with his own two hands. They still stand are in still in use by the family today.

In my mother’s family, Norwegian was the only language spoken in the home for many years. My mother only began to speak English when she started attending school at the age of six.

Growing up in Alaska, I came to love its wild beauty, its endless twilights, and its titanic scale. I developed an appreciation for wild animals which expresses itself today in my abhorrence for any mistreatment or unnecessary killing of my fellow Earth creatures.

My family maintained close ties with their kin in northern Minnesota. Some of my happiest memories were of our months-long visits to my grandparent’s farm, where the 1880s farm house stood in a commanding position on one of the few hills in that flat land of big skies. It was also a great adventure to travel by car from Alaska to Minnesota in those days, across the Yukon and western Canada on thousands of miles of curving gravel roads, including the Alcan Highway.

My father eventually left the Air Force and took a position with the United States Department of the Interior. After several years, he was promoted to a job in Washington, D.C. We moved to Alexandria, Virginia, a suburb of D.C.

I became interested in electronics at an early age, spurred by an exposure to shortwave radio at the age of 11. I became an amateur radio operator at the age of 16. This interest eventually led to a career as a broadcast engineer, which I still pursue in addition to my patriotic work.

Patriotic Feelings

Even as a very young child, I can remember having strong positive feelings about America — both the grand and majestic land itself, and its optimistic, intelligent, deeply feeling, creative, and truly beautiful people. I might not have known how to put it into words at the time, but I loved my country and I loved my race. I was a born patriot.

The America I grew up in was the Old America, White America. Prior to the mid-1960s, when the social and racial and cultural fabric of America began to unravel, America was a very different place than it is today. With a few exceptions, the men were strong, sturdy, honorable and able. The women were feminine, nurturing, and beautiful. Everyone seemed to know who they were and where they were going. Identity crises were almost unknown. Everyone seemed to share decent values. There was a beautiful sense of optimism and almost innocence in the air. People trusted each other. They left their doors unlocked. They helped each other. There was a real sense of community.

I loved the Old America. I loved its art and its architecture. I loved its celebrations and its piety. I loved its civilized codes of dress and conduct. Even today, in the closing years of the twentieth century, you can still get a feeling of what the Old America was like in some small towns where the old buildings still stand, where the streets are still kept clean by the increasingly elderly White inhabitants, where the minority invasion has not yet made its presence known. Imperfect the Old America may have been, but it was, comparitively speaking, a wonderful place to grow up. I truly felt it to be my country, a place where I belonged.

Looking back on the 1950s and early 60s now, I can see that the people of that time were too carefree and innocent. They were foolish. They let the Old America slip out of their hands. They allowed alien mind-molders and subversives to take it away from them. They didn’t listen when patriots tried to warn them of the conspiracy against their freedom and their very race itself. They failed to understand that “Eternal vigilance is the price of Liberty.” But that’s getting ahead of my story.

Washington and Social Turmoil

It was with eager anticipation and high hopes that I arrived in Washington, D.C. in November 1963. At first I loved the city. Crossing the Potomac River, I was filled with feelings of awe, wonder, and reverence as I looked upon the great gilt statues of Winged Victory, the great Classical-style monuments to Washington, Jefferson, and Lincoln, and the majestic Capitol and Supreme Court buildings, among many others. Here, I thought, are fitting monuments to America, the country I love! Here, I thought, is graven in stone the greatness and the unchangeable principles of my beloved nation! Here, surely, must work the great men, the leaders who will apply those principles and ensure that our nation, our people, and our freedom shall never perish from the Earth!

I was to be greatly disappointed.

By the late 1960s, America was being literally ripped apart by two interrelated battles: the so-called “civil rights” revolution and the Vietnam War.

I well remember the marches, the assassinations, and the riots. I particularly remember the so-called “Moratorium” marches on Washington, which the largely Jewish New Left leaders had organized around 1969 to 1970. I didn’t attend them, though many of my schoolmates did. Many of those who didn’t attend wore black armbands to school to show their solidarity with the marchers. At the time, like many American patriots, I believed that the war in Vietnam was a righteous war against Communism. I made my own red, white, and blue armband to wear to school to show my defiance to the New Leftists and the others who were, in my view, pro-Communist and anti-American. What really disgusted me was the fact that so many of my fellow students supported the New Left and wore the black armbands not because of any reasoned opposition to the war or political ideas, but merely because it was the fashionable, “in” thing to do.

Like millions of Americans, I watched these so-called “anti-war” marches on television. I was revolted by the spectacle of half-naked young people of my generation carrying Communist flags and publicly using drugs, declaring that the country that gave them birth was evil. If their opposition to the war had been based on the fact that it was a waste of young American’s lives (which I now realize it was) or on the fact that it was a sham which wasted our country’s resources and demoralized us while a corrupt, criminal, and pro-Communist establishment made a pretense of “fighting Communism” (which I now realize it was), then perhaps I would have listened with interest to the protesters. But these protesters, who flouted all standards of civilization and patriotism, were openly declaring that their opposition to the war was based on the fact that a few darling Asiatic Communists were being killed. They were carrying the red flags of Communism in the streets of our nation’s capital. They were chanting “Ho – Ho – Ho – Chi – Minh, Ho Chi Minh is going to win!” — along with various obscenities.

And I noticed, with growing amazement, that the major newspapers and television commentators, whom I, along with most other Americans, had regarded with respect as icons of the American establishment, were siding with the Communist swine who had openly declared their hatred for — and intention to destroy — America. It was at this point that I first began to sense that something was profoundly wrong with this country. I began to see that the problem was far deeper than just a few obvious Communist revolutionaries in the street. I began to understand that the Establishment itself, the institutions of money and power in America, were themselves aligned with the subversive forces that were destroying us.

I began to see that decent Americans were being squeezed from both above and below; from below came the Black and Communist rioters in the street and on the campus — and from above came the news media, mainline churches, Liberal think-tanks, foundations, and other powerful institutions promoting a “social change” agenda. From both above and below came the push to change America from an outpost of European civilization and the traditional values that that implies, to a multiracial province of a one-world “utopia” ruled by all-wise and all-powerful “social planners.”

My awakening was reinforced when, not much later, our heretofore rather conservative Lutheran church began praising the virtues of Black Communist “freedom fighters” in Rhodesia, singing “We Shall Overcome” after Sunday School in solidarity with “Martin Luther” King’s “civil rights” movement, and condemning those terrible right-wing extremists who dared to criticize King, Communists, or the United Nations. When the parents weren’t around, the assistant pastor even told the high-school Sunday school class that “If Jesus came back to Earth today, he would be called a Communist.”

I knew something was wrong. I began to look for answers.

A Very Special Teacher

I must give credit for part of my awakening to a courageous and patriotic history teacher at my junior high school. He encouraged his students to look beyond the clichés and the headlines for the real forces at work behind the scenes. Though he never preached in class, he did present patriotic pro-American ideas as one point of view to be considered in the ongoing political and social revolution that was taking place. I inwardly resonated with and gravitated toward those ideas. As an antidote to the leftist bias of most of the other teachers, my history teacher brought into his classroom a number of books, newspapers and magazines with a pro-American, Rightist, or pro-White point of view, for his students to read after they had completed their assignments or to borrow and read at their leisure. How many other 12- and 13-year-olds were reading The American Mercury, American Opinion, Western Destiny, Richard Cotten’s Conservative Viewpoint, or H. L. Hunt’s Lifeline? My history classes were a welcome island of intellectual freedom and patriotism and sanity; a refuge from the anti-White, anti-Western, and anti-American influences that were almost everywhere else at the school.

Inspired by my courageous teacher, I began to seek out the truth on my own.

The Birch Business

Eventually this quest for truth led me to a group known as the John Birch Society. The Society was attractive to me for many reasons. It was forthrightly and unashamedly pro-American and anti-Communist. It claimed leadership in the field of patriotic endeavor, with some justification. It had a long and, I thought, honorable history of exposing and fighting internal subversion, which, in America, has always been a much greater threat than external conquest. It was not saddled with a lot of irrelevant religious baggage, as were far too many patriotic groups. It exposed those high on the ladder of the American establishment who were working to destroy this country, whom the Society called “insiders.”

Though the Society had the grandest of intentions, and though it did do a limited amount of education and awakening of the public, it really didn’t seem to be getting anywhere. I later discovered that this was because members of the group were forbidden to discuss a certain topic, a topic that is crucial for a full understanding of our nation’s dilemma. This topic was race. Ultimately, I came to realize that the Society was a dead end, a cul-de-sac where patriots expended their precious time, money, and energy going in circles while America’s real enemies smiled from a distance, secure in their safety because of the Society’s self-imposed censorship.

While a member of the John Birch Society, I continued to maintain friendly contact with patriots in other groups. One day in 1981, while I was visiting with a lady who led a weekly patriotic forum in Arlington, Virginia, I noticed a newspaper on her coffee table with the provocative headline “Equality – Man’s Most Dangerous Myth.” The newspaper was edited by Dr. William Pierce, a man I was to meet and with whom I began working just a few months later.

Racial Awakening

Kevin Strom and son, 1993

Though I had long felt that the “civil rights” agitation was destructive and served the purposes of America’s enemies; and though I had instinctively chosen to associate mainly with members of my own race; and though the art, architecture, and music which I loved were all the creation of White Western Civilization; and though I had sympathized with White Rhodesians and South Africans as they tried to protect their world from a Marxist-led savage onslaught; the truth is that before 1981 I had never thought really seriously about race. If you had come up to me with the idea of the primacy of race in all things I would have dismissed it. I, like so many right-wingers today, was enamored of the theory that gives primacy to ideas, to what a person or a society believes. What patriots were fighting for, I thought, were the ideas of freedom and liberty and order that undergirded America and the Western world. Although in a limited sense I was right, what Dr. Pierce forced me to see was that what a person or group believes is not nearly so important as what they actually are. For what one believes is mutable, and often changes throughout one’s lifetime. But what a person actually is, all of his potential for knowledge or ignorance, understanding or obtuseness, kindness or cruelty, altruism or selfishness, achievement or failure — all of these things are graven into his body and soul by the immutable and unchangeable patterns of his genetic inheritance.

Dr. Pierce expanded the horizons of my understanding from a narrow political-ideological point of view to an all-encompassing biological view of the world and all life in the world.

I learned that America, and indeed Western civilization itself in all its aspects, was a result of the genetic inheritance of its creators, the European race. So also was Oriental civilization the product of the tendencies and potentials inherent in the Asian race, and so on. This was not a doctrine of “hate,” as its detractors had painted it. It was a doctrine of respect for Life and Nature’s laws. I felt as though a cloudy film had been peeled from my eyes and I could for the first time see my surroundings with crystal clarity. The racial world-view puts patriotism in its proper place in the natural order of things. I saw that patriotism is not a mysterious concept to either be accepted without question or jeered at by sophisticates who see its lack of logical foundation — patriotism is simply loyalty to one’s kind, one’s tribe, one’s race. And those who created Communism and who are, under a thousand guises, subverting America, were exposed for the vicious parasites they always were, whose loyalties have never been with America or with the West — and never can be, because of what they are.

The biological world-view of Dr. Pierce expanded my horizons in other ways as well. I now thought not just in terms of years or decades, or just in terms of solving temporary political or social problems, but instead in terms of millennia, and in terms of the gradual development of my people from their earliest origins to their ultimate destiny.

This is the way in which Americans must begin to think if they are to remain a viable nation, if they are to have descendants who will be Americans in anything else but name. If we are to survive, we must not only have a burning desire that our descendants will carry on in the land our ancestors conquered and built; but we must also have an unshakable conviction of who we are. This is the contribution that the racial point of view makes to the patriotic struggle. Without a sure sense of our own identity, all else is for naught. If the enemies of America and the West manage to destroy all of our cities — if they raze them to the ground and with them destroy all our libraries, all the knowledge that prior generations of our race accumulated over thousands of years; if they destroy every work of art and science that has ever been created — it could all be built again, even greater than before. There could be another Athens, another Parthenon. There could be another Caesar, another Shakespeare, another Poe, another Darwin, another Edison, another Shockley. Our entire civilization could be built again from scratch, and our outreached hands could still grasp the stars, as long as the germ of our civilization — the gene pool of our race — remains intact. But if the evil or the thoughtlessness of a single generation corrupts that gene pool through racial mixing, or attenuates it through childlessness, what is lost can never be regained. If such evils persist much longer than a generation, the race will cease to be what it once was, and we and our kind will no longer walk the face of this planet. These are the truths that William Pierce and my other mentors taught me. They are hard truths. Perhaps I was, in some sense, already prepared for them. I hope that I am preparing the way for a generation who will carry the Truth, and our uniquely beautiful and noble race, to victory.

WHAT WOULD YOU SAY if a Liberal “social scientist” told you to jump into a pool filled with five hundred ravenous piranhas?

If you valued your life, you’d certainly refuse the invitation.

But what if the Liberal “social scientist” tried to convince you to go ahead and jump in, with the argument that “not all of the piranhas are aggressive. Some of them probably just want to make friends with you, and really aren’t hungry either. To say that a piranha is going to attack you, just because he’s a piranha, is a wicked stereotype, and probably contributes to the piranhas’ negative feelings about you.”

If that argument was made to you, would you then jump into the pool filled with piranhas? I don’t think so. You’d probably reason, quite logically, that even if there were one or two or even a dozen piranhas that by chance or due to a recent meal decided not to attack you, that certainly wouldn’t change the bloodthirsty behavior of the other 488.

And it certainly wouldn’t change the outcome of any foolish foray into the pool.

But let’s say you were foolish enough to listen to the Liberal “social scientist,” and you did jump into the pool filled with piranhas. You somehow managed to survive. You made it to the other side of the pool, where you jumped out, but you were seriously injured in the process. After you got out of the hospital, where your wounds were stitched up and your lost blood was replaced, you were paid a visit by your old “friend,” the Liberal “social scientist.”

Needless to say, you weren’t too happy to see him, but before you could say a word, he started talking.

“I’m awfully sorry to see how you’ve been hurt,” he said, “but it isn’t my fault at all, you see.”

You replied, “You mean, oh great and wise social scientist, that you can finally see that those piranhas are vicious and I don’t belong in the pool with them?”

“No, I don’t mean that at all,” answered the Liberal “social scientist,” “It’s not the piranhas’ fault that you almost got eaten alive. It’s not the poor piranhas’ fault at all! It’s your fault!”

“My fault!” you exclaimed, “How the Hell could it be my fault?”

“Ah, how little you bourgeois middle Americans understand,” sighed our Liberal genius, “Don’t you see that what happened to you only happened because those poor piranhas were underprivileged and hungry? If you’d given them enough food and a decent chance at life, then they wouldn’t have attacked you like they did. When was the last time you helped a piranha? They’ve been struggling for centuries while your kind lived in luxury. Don’t you think it’s time the tables were turned? And not only that, but you ordinary Americans have caused the poor innocent piranhas to feel left out in your society. Naturally they harbor negative feelings about you, when you never want to have anything to do with them. You should understand that we all hate what we don’t know. We must integrate piranhas into our society, keep them in our swimming pools and bathtubs and introduce them into all our rivers, mountain streams, and lakes. By associating with piranhas every day, and by feeding them as much as they want to eat, eventually a spirit of brotherhood will emerge and we and the piranhas will live together in peace, harmony, and joyous diversity evermore.

“But you, Mr. Ordinary American” — and here the Liberal “social scientist” thrust his flabby little finger into your face — “you are going to have to change your evil ways before we can have that happy world!”

“You’re out of your mind!” you replied. “Piranhas may be fine in the Amazon jungle, but you’re crazy if you think we can live and associate with them every day. We and they just don’t belong together — and if you’re so in love with piranhas, why don’t you go on a little swim with them? And if you think I’m going to waste my money and time feeding them and helping them multiply just so they can eat me and my family alive at some time in the future, Mr. Genius social scientist, then you’ve got another think coming!” With that you kicked his delicate carcass downstairs.

Still smarting from his fall, and rapidly retreating backwards, the Liberal “social scientist” shook his spindly fist and called back to you, “Your generation is hopeless. You’ll never understand the need to integrate with and support piranhas. But your children will. Our ‘brotherhood’ program at the elementary school will teach them that it’s their duty to live with and help the poor piranhas. They’ll be swimming with them every day at the school’s pool. And that’s just the first step! There’s nothing you can do about it!”

Gradually the voice of your former friend the Liberal faded away, but he certainly gave you something to think about, didn’t he?

The ‘Liberal Social Scientist’ Returns

Now it seems Mr. Social Scientist has become a bird lover. He’s still smarting from the last time you kicked him downstairs, but just to show you that there are no hard feelings, he has decided to invite you to a meeting of an organization he’s working with called the “Bird Benevolent Society.” Since you’ve always been a bird watcher and animal lover, and since you foolishly believe that the Liberal Social Scientist has learned a lesson, you agree that you’ll go.

On the appointed day you show up at the meeting hall, and find several hundred other people, some obviously drawn from the dregs of society by their appearance, but also mixed with a strong contingent of the empty-headed wealthy, whom you’ve seen at various charitable and “world-improving” functions in town. There’s the usual collection of “homeless advocates,” pervert agitators, “Feed the Africans” charity types, and a motley collection of minority activists and “Rainbow Coalition” idiots.

All the conversations in the room stop when our learned humanitarian friend, the Liberal Social Scientist, strides past his international banker and tax-exempt foundation friends up to the podium to address the group.

He clears his throat and begins speaking:

“Welcome dear friends and friends of progress,” he says, “to this meeting of the Bird Benevolent Society. I know that we are all united in our love for our feathered friends, the birds, and I know that we all yearn to bring them into the coming new millennium of progress and unity and global cooperation and peace. But the birds of this world are being held back by evil ideas and outmoded traditions that border on fascism. It will be the mission of the Bird Benevolent Society to enlighten the birds and help them to change their ways, assisted by you people of goodwill, and of course by government grants of taxpayer money and the behind-the-scenes help of my banker and foundation friends here beside me on the dais.

“We look at the world of the birds with dismay and sadness. Everywhere we find disunity, strife, misunderstanding, and conflict. We see the sparrows off in one corner among themselves, eating seeds and singing their songs; while off in another far corner are the eagles, fishing in the sea and singing an altogether different song. Every species and variety of bird seems to have its own place, its own territory, and this leads to conflict among birds. Every species of bird has its own habits and behavior and language and this leads to misunderstanding among our feathered friends. It leads to further and further separation and isolation among the different types of birds and we all must of course agree that this simply won’t do in this modern age of global unity, peace, and understanding. I call all this separation and misunderstanding ‘bird racism.’

“We must conquer these problems. What we will do is this: We will gather all the birds of the world together, and teach them a new way of living, all for their own good, of course. The eagle will nest with the sparrow, the chicken with the crows, and the cardinal with the chickadee. By close association, they will eventually come to love each other, aided by our extensive program of re-education which will replace the old bird-racist ways taught to the young birds by their parents. After a few generations of enforced togetherness, the birds will forget their evil old ways and will never know that they were separate species once upon a time. We will call this bird-paradise the ‘United Birds.’

“And then, my friends,” and here our Liberal Social Scientist’s eyes begin to gleam, “we will begin the final phase of our plan, which is really the ultimate solution to all the problems of the birds. We will teach the birds that it is virtuous and desirable for them to choose mates who are not of their own species. Black birds will mate with white birds, and red with yellow, and so forth. Our educational programs will teach them that it is the worst kind of wickedness and evil to oppose this. Of course, we know that this goes against the instincts of the birds, and so we might have some trouble with it. But within the structure of the United Birds, we will have complete control over all education and information received by the birds. Even their recreational activities will be under our guidance. So we are confident that, in time, our efforts to encourage cross-species mating will be successful, and there will be a new kind of bird in the world — one kind of bird — a one-world bird — a true citizen of the United Birds, with its mind and behavior molded by our scientific guidance, totally free of the old ways of separation and conflict.”

A huge wave of applause fills the meeting hall, and the wealthy members of the audience begin to pull out their checkbooks to make donations to the Bird Benevolent Society. But you’ve sat there politely listening to this nonsense long enough. You leap up onto the dais, grab the microphone, and begin speaking:

“You people are crazy to give money to this outfit! Bird Benevolent Society, indeed! This organization must be run by people who hate birds, not love them! Different species’ different habits and ways are the result of thousands and thousands of years of natural selection. Each is particularly suited to its environment, both in its physical appearance and in its mental makeup and behavior. That’s what makes a blue jay not only look different from a cardinal, but act different, too. The difference in external appearance is just a sign of the inner difference in genetic makeup, which determines how they act, what they eat, how they choose a mate and build a nest, raise their young and every other thing they do. If you force them to live together and to give up their different modes of living, you’ll just end up causing conflict, violence, confusion and misery for them instead of the paradise you’re promising! Their natural, inborn differences are what make our feathered friends what they are! Can’t you see that? Can’t you see that you’ll be destroying all that by making them all mix together, that you’ll literally be killing them? How dare you try to tear down all that Nature has taken millennia to build up! How dare you claim you are doing this for the ‘good’ of the birds! How dare you call yourselves bird lovers! And let me ask you this question, what the Hell good does it do for you to set up this United Birds nonsense? Why can’t you just leave the birds alone to live as they always have, just as Nature intended?”

At this point, your old friend the Liberal Social Scientist motions to a couple of burly men in dark uniforms, who proceed to remove you from the stage and into a back room, where you are roughed up enough to keep you quiet for a while. Then the Liberal Social Scientist enters the room and gives you a little lecture:

“My friend, my friend, you have so much to learn — and to unlearn — here in the New World Order. I can’t have you doing foolish things and wrecking our well-laid plans. But you have drive and energy that we may be able to use someday, once you learn the rules. So I will be happy to explain what we are doing in, ah, a bit more detail. Have you caught your breath enough to ask me some questions?

“Ah, well, I see you’re in no condition to speak at the moment. Here’s my handkerchief, wipe that horrid blood away. I hope you’ve learned your lesson and your place. I think I can anticipate your questions anyway.

“Look out that window on your left, and you’ll see our construction crews putting the finishing touches on our latest building project. You see they’re not working in wood or brick. Because they’re not building a headquarters for the Bird Benevolent Society. No indeed, they’re working in wire mesh, building a great dome, just one of many great wire mesh domes we are building, within which will be the United Birds itself. We’ve found that the poor birds don’t know what’s good for them, and are constantly trying to find a way to fly away from us, so we’re building these new homes for them, where our great social experiment can take place. Oh, it’s true, some have called them cages, but we prefer to call them planned housing projects. And of course, there are many birds outside the domes still living in the old ways, but soon we will have enough of the United Birds in our peace-keeping forces trained to attack their fellows who refuse to submit to our beneficent rule, and I can confidently predict that within a few years the United Birds will encompass all birds and there will simply be no place to fly to that isn’t already under our central administration. Then we can go on to the final stage of our glorious plan.

“Oh, and I almost forgot your final impertinent question. You wanted to know what we got out of it, what our personal motivation was for this plan for social change among the birds. I seem to recall you even questioned our right to call ourselves ‘bird lovers.’ Well we are bird lovers — of a kind. We want a world of peaceful birds, just as we said. Peaceful and docile. We want a world of well-educated birds, just as we promise. Educated — by us — to do what we want them to do. We want a world of birds which has forgotten their own separate and traditional ways, since those old ways might get in the way of our plans and might form the basis of loyalty and cohesion among some birds. We don’t want that. We want their loyalty to be only to us, only to the United Birds.”

And at this point he turns to face you directly, with his hooked nose only an inch in front of yours, and he concludes his little lecture:

“Then it will be much easier for us to practice our love of birds. We did it all for the love of birds!”

And as he leers menacingly into your face you can detect the smell of raw flesh upon his breath, and you can see on his throbbing lower lip a thick drop of blood in which is suspended a tiny white feather.

*    *    *

These “Bird Lovers” Say They Love You, Too

I have little to add to this fable of the Liberal Social Scientist and the Bird Benevolent Society, except to say that the same kind of people who claim here to be bird lovers also say they’re just overflowing with love for you, too.

And if you can’t see through their nonsense about “world government” and “world law” and “peace-keeping forces” and “racial diversity” and the “democratic community of nations” and all the rest of it, then you and your family are nothing but food on the tables of your rulers, and you will deserve exactly what you get.

*    *    *

The illustrations used here were created by the Swedish Folktribunen.

TODAY I WILL step back from the minutiae of social and political issues, and attempt to answer what are really the ultimate questions. Why should we or anyone else make sacrifices for our nation or our race? Why is it important for our race to survive? What is our basis for saying that some acts are right and good and others are wrong?

I can think of no better way to introduce this subject than with an essay written by Mr. Martin Kerr entitled, “White and Proud”:

“There is a lot of talk these days about Black pride, Jewish pride, Hispanic pride, even gay pride. In fact, there is only one major segment of the population which is not encouraged to take pride in its heritage and in the achievements of its ancestors. That group is the White race.

“The lack of White pride is truly a sad and strange thing because no group has more to be rightfully proud of than the White people of the world. The glories and greatness that the men and women of our race have won over the centuries should serve as a source of eternal pride and inspiration to White people everywhere.

“Since the dawn of history we have been a mighty race of builders, explorers, artists, warriors, inventors, philosophers, and cultivators. We have sailed the seas, tamed vast wildernesses, scaled towering mountains and journeyed to the depths of the ocean and into the cold void of outer space. We have built great civilizations, created breathtaking works of beauty, and made the deserts bloom. The technological achievements of our people — from the megalithic calendar of Stonehenge to the moonwalk of the Apollo astronauts — are unequaled. We have devised sublime philosophies, conquered deadly diseases, and performed soul-stirring acts of heroism and self-sacrifice.

“We are the race of Shakespeare, Leonardo da Vinci, Beethoven, and Homer. We are the sons and daughters of Leif Erikson, Christopher Columbus, Sir Francis Drake, and Magellan. We are the folk of Alexander, Caesar, Napoleon, Washington, and Robert E. Lee. We are the descendants of Pythagoras, Galileo, Copernicus, Newton, and Darwin. Just to list the great accomplishments of our race would require the work of a lifetime. No one has more to be proud of than we do.

“In order for an individual to be psychologically healthy, he or she must have a clear-cut sense of identity and self-worth. And for our race as a whole to be strong and healthy, White people everywhere must develop a sense of racial identity and racial worth. There is no better way to obtain this very necessary level of racial awareness than in having pride in your people and their accomplishments.

“So take pride in your race, pride in what we have achieved in days gone by — and pride in what we will yet accomplish as we reach for the stars.”

There is something about our race which makes us indisposed to brag or talk very much about our accomplishments. We feel it is “bad form,” or bad manners, and furthermore we see it as a sign of weakness. Our instinct tells us that the inferior man will flap his gums and tell the world how “great” he is to cover up his lack of real achievement and character. The superior man has no such need. And we often apply this principle to our race and our nation as well as to individuals. We see excessive chauvinism or nationalism as ungentlemanly and somehow suspect.

This reticence, which may be allied to our race’s inborn tendency to seek out objective truth and discount subjective feelings, seems a fine and noble thing, and it has served us well and made life more tolerable during the millennia that our people lived almost exclusively among our own kind. But in the distinctly unnatural environment in which White Americans now find themselves, where we are mixed with and jostled by a thousand different tribes and peoples in what used to be our country, this reluctance to “blow our own horn” can work against us. An unspoken, instinctive acknowledgment of our own preeminence is no longer enough. Our instinctive pride of race and nation is now attacked on all sides by peoples who have no such reticence and among whom the virtue of humility is unknown.

An entire generation of Americans has grown up in an environment in which the news media, the entertainment and music industries, the major publishing houses, and the public school system have all spoken with one voice and that voice has said: “White people are the cancer of the Earth. They have enslaved and killed and polluted and destroyed everything they have touched. There are no differences between the races except skin color. White people have no right to keep their nations White. White people have no right to live and work among their own kind. There is no reason for the White race to survive. Racial mixing is the inevitable wave of the future. White racial feelings are a manifestation of ultimate evil. It would be better if all the races mixed so there would be an end to the White race and thus to White racism.”

It is vital that our young people be given an antidote to this alien poison. It is vital that they be given back a pride in their people, and the will to survive as a people in the dangerous, hostile world into which they were born. That is the mission of this program.

I know that Americans are reluctant to speak about race. I know that they look over their shoulders and lower their voices when about to utter an unapproved opinion. But we must overcome this reluctance. In our present situation it can only be described as suicidal.

We must succeed in the mission of this program because we must survive as a people. In ages past no one needed to explain that. We knew it in our hearts, in our souls. We knew we must survive. It was the unspoken assumption that made our work worthwhile, our cooperation necessary, and our patriotism vital and alive.

In today’s urbanized, globalized, money-oriented, multiracial society, though, we have lost touch with our souls, with our true inner spirit, with our instincts. We are more… “rational.” We demand answers and reasons for everything.

Western man stands at a point of crisis brought on partly by his own spirit of reason and partly by the aliens and traitors who have purposely shaken his will to live. For today we ask ourselves, “Why should we survive?”

And the answers given to that question, even by the most sincere, are usually incomplete and unsatisfactory. Often they depend on an interpretation of ancient religious writings, the relevance and meaning of which are subject to endless debate and disagreement.

There must be an answer to that question which does not contradict our true spiritual feelings and which also does not contradict the observed facts of Nature.

“Why should we survive?” implies another deeper question –- “Why are we here?” In a way, that latter question answers itself, as I’ll show.

Why are we here? Why are we alive in this incomprehensibly vast universe, on this mote of dust that we call Earth that hangs suspended near the trailing edge of one among billions of galaxies which each contains a billion suns? What is it all about?

I said that, in a way, the question answers itself. Now I am not saying that we have complete and specific answers to every aspect of that question. Many gaps remain in our knowledge of the evolution of matter and of life, for example. But we have achieved, through uncounted eons of upward development and struggle, the ability to understand ourselves and to understand the processes of life and of the universe to an almost infinitely greater degree than any other creature on this planet.

For all of our hard won knowledge, however, the best men among us know all too well that we cannot at this time fully answer the question which I posed a moment ago — “Why are we here? What is it all about?” Our quest to understand the majesty and the meaning of creation has left us with a profound realization of our own limitations. If they are honest, our most advanced scientists will admit this, as will our profoundest philosophers and theologians.

Therefore, if we are to understand the purpose of our lives, if we are to answer my question “Why are we here?” then we most urgently need to surpass ourselves, to increase our understanding and our knowledge a hundred fold, a thousand fold, a million fold. Merely because the best men of our race represent the highest development of consciousness on this planet at this time is no reason to believe that a higher development is not possible.

Aware of our limitations and of our inability to honestly and completely and certainly answer the ultimate question of meaning and purpose, we can see now with unblinking eyes the certainty that at our present stage of development, our mission, our purpose, must be to do whatever is necessary to continue this process of increasing knowledge, of increasing consciousness, of upward development. Our purpose must be to make possible the answering of those ultimate questions. By laying the groundwork for a higher humanity, a higher consciousness, which will be able to answer those questions, we are fulfilling the highest purpose that Man can conceive at  his present stage of development.

To successfully pursue this mission we will need better scientists, more profound philosophers, more creative inventors, and more responsible leaders than have ever existed before on planet Earth.

I ask you, ladies and gentleman, is that the direction that America is taking today? Are we still advancing, still heading for the stars?

Or are we headed for the gutter?

At the beginning of this program I asked another important question: What is our basis for saying that some acts are right and good and others are wrong? In other words: What is the basis of morality? Our answer to this question must not be at variance with our inborn moral sense nor must it be based on any absolutist dogma which cannot be carried out in the real world. For morality to have any meaning at all it must be a realistic guide to action. If you believe, as we do, that our purpose on this Earth is to continue on the upward path, to advance, insofar as it is in our abilities to do so, in our struggle for a higher, nobler consciousness — then the answer to that moral question becomes obvious.

First, we must realize that, despite all its imperfections and shortcomings, the gene pool of our race represents the highest development that Nature has yet produced on Earth. It is our most precious possession. Our present stage of development was reached by countless generations of struggle and natural selection — but it can be destroyed beyond any hope of repair or restoration by a single thoughtless and selfish generation. We must never allow our gene pool to be corrupted. Nature’s gift to our people must be jealously guarded.

Secondly, we must recognize that these gifts of mind and spirit and beauty which mark us as a race apart from the rest of mankind were obtained only as a result of a relentless winnowing of our people over hundreds of thousands of years in accord with Nature’s unalterable law of survival of the fittest.

We must also recognize that our civilization and our technology have over the last few millennia largely shielded us from a continuation of this winnowing process, thus slowing or even reversing our upward development at the genetic level.

Armed with a love for our people, with the will to fulfill our destiny, and with our scientific knowledge, we can return our people to the upward path and become conscious agents of our own evolution.

In short, the answer to our moral question is this: Whatever is good for our people, for our race, in the long term, is good. Whatever will advance our race toward ever higher levels of physical and spiritual development, whatever brings us closer to that destiny which our Creator intends for us, is good. And whatever threatens the survival of our people, or which puts us on the downward path, is evil.

This moral standard must be relentlessly applied to every individual, to every institution, to every organization, to every religion, to every proposed program or course of action, and to every expenditure of money in our entire society.

When seen through the lens of a true morality the scales fall from the observer’s eyes and the hypocrisy and treason and criminal waste of our time and our inheritance become painfully, almost unbearably, obvious.

I’m sure that you’ve said to yourself, “White Americans don’t stick together anymore.” We are a divided people and the enemy’s strategy of divide and conquer is working very well. Our people think of themselves as Democrats or Republicans, conservatives or liberals, Christians or free thinkers, Baptists or Catholics. The fallacy of that line of thinking is that it gives primacy to what a person believes. If a person shares our beliefs, it is thought that he is “one of us” — if a Hottentot or Jew professes a love for the Bible or the Constitution then he magically becomes a Christian or an American.

Rather than giving primacy to what a person believes, however, we ought to give primacy to what a person actually is. Our race and our nation are one, and every member of our people, regardless of the brainwashing to which he has been subjected and the alien belief system which has been stuffed down his throat, is one of us. And within our souls lie the same spiritual urges which motivated the greatest men of our race to give their all so that our world could be born.

Let us not shirk our responsibility to pass on that heritage increased, not diminished, to the next generation of our people.

WHEN THE COMMUNISTS TOOK OVER a country, one of the first things that they did was to confiscate all the privately-held weapons, to deny the people the physical ability to resist tyranny. But even more insidious than the theft of the people’s weapons was the theft of their history. Official Communist “historians” rewrote history to fit the current party line. In many countries, revered national heroes were excised from the history books, or their real deeds were distorted to fit Communist ideology, and Communist killers and criminals were converted into official “saints.” Holidays were declared in honor of the beasts who murdered countless nations. Did you know that much the same process has occurred right here in America?

Every January, the media go into a kind of almost spastic frenzy of adulation for the so-called “Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King, Jr.” King has even had a national holiday declared in his honor, an honor accorded to no other American, not Washington, not Jefferson, not Lincoln. (Washington and Lincoln no longer have holidays — they share the generic-sounding “President’s Day.”) A liberal judge has sealed the FBI files on King until the year 2027. What are they hiding? Let’s take a look at this modern-day plastic god.

Born in 1929, King was the son of a Black preacher known at the time only as “Daddy King.” “Daddy King” named his son Michael. In 1935, “Daddy King” had an inspiration to name himself after the Protestant reformer Martin Luther. He declared to his congregation that henceforth they were to refer to him as “Martin Luther King” and to his son as “Martin Luther King, Jr.” None of this name changing was ever legalized in court. “Daddy” King’s son’s real name is to this day Michael King.

King’s Brazen Cheating

We read in Michael Hoffman’s Holiday for a Cheater:

The first public sermon that King ever gave, in 1947 at the Ebenezer Baptist Church, was plagiarized from a homily by Protestant clergyman Harry Emerson Fosdick entitled “Life is What You Make It,” according to the testimony of King’s best friend of that time, Reverend Larry H. Williams. The first book that King wrote, Stride Toward Freedom, was plagiarized from numerous sources, all unattributed, according to documentation recently assembled by sympathetic King scholars Keith D. Miller, Ira G. Zepp, Jr., and David J. Garrow. And no less an authoritative source than the four senior editors of The Papers of Martin Luther King, Jr. (an official publication of the Martin Luther King Center for Nonviolent Social Change, Inc., whose staff includes King’s widow Coretta), stated of King’s writings at both Boston University and Crozer Theological Seminary: “Judged retroactively by the standards of academic scholarship, [his writings] are tragically flawed by numerous instances of plagiarism…. Appropriated passages are particularly evident in his writings in his major field of graduate study, systematic theology.” King’s essay, “The Place of Reason and Experience in Finding God,” written at Crozer, pirated passages from the work of theologian Edgar S. Brightman, author of The Finding of God. Another of King’s theses, “Contemporary Continental Theology,” written shortly after he entered Boston University, was largely stolen from a book by Walter Marshall Horton. King’s doctoral dissertation, “A Comparison of the Conceptions of God in the Thinking of Paul Tillich and Harry Nelson Wieman,” for which he was awarded a PhD in theology, contains more than fifty complete sentences plagiarized from the PhD dissertation of Dr. Jack Boozer, “The Place of Reason in Paul Tillich’s Concept of God.”

According to The Martin Luther King Papers, in King’s dissertation “only 49 per cent. of sentences in the section on Tillich contain five or more words that were King’s own….”!

In The Journal of American History, June 1991, page 87, David J. Garrow, a leftist academic who is sympathetic to King, says that King’s wife, Coretta Scott King, who also served as his secretary, was an accomplice in his repeated cheating. Reading Garrow’s article, one is led to the inescapable conclusion that King cheated because he had chosen for himself a political role in which a PhD would be useful, and, lacking the intellectual ability to obtain the title fairly, went after it by any means necessary. Why, then, one might ask, did the professors at Crozer Theological Seminary and Boston University grant him passing grades and a PhD? Garrow states on page 89: “King’s academic compositions, especially at Boston University, were almost without exception little more than summary descriptions… and comparisons of other’s writings. Nonetheless, the papers almost always received desirable letter grades, strongly suggesting that King’s professors did not expect more….”

The editors of The Martin Luther King Jr. Papers state that “…the failure of King’s teachers to notice his pattern of textual appropriation is somewhat remarkable….”

But researcher Michael Hoffman tells us “…actually the malfeasance of the professors is not at all remarkable. King was politically correct, he was Black, and he had ambitions. The leftist [professors were] happy to award a doctorate to such a candidate no matter how much fraud was involved. Nor is it any wonder that it has taken forty years for the truth about King’s record of nearly constant intellectual piracy to be made public.”

Supposed scholars, who in reality shared King’s vision of a racially mixed and Marxist America, purposely covered up his cheating for decades. The cover-up still continues. From the New York Times of October 11, 1991, page 15, we learn that on October 10th of that year, a committee of researchers at Boston University admitted that, “There is no question but that Dr. King plagiarized in the dissertation.” However, despite its finding, the committee said that “No thought should be given to the revocation of Dr. King’s doctoral degree,” an action the panel said “would serve no purpose.”

No purpose, indeed! Justice demands that, in light of his willful fraud as a student, the titles “reverend” and the “doctor” should be removed from King’s name.

Communist Beliefs and Connections

Well friends, he is not a legitimate reverend, he is not a bona fide PhD, and his name isn’t really “Martin Luther King, Jr.” What’s left? Just a sexual degenerate, an America-hating Communist, and a criminal betrayer of even the interests of his own people.

On Labor Day, 1957, a special meeting was attended by Martin Luther King and four others at a strange institution called the Highlander Folk School in Monteagle, Tennessee. The Highlander Folk School was a Communist front, having been founded by Myles Horton (Communist Party organizer for Tennessee) and Don West (Communist Party organizer for North Carolina). The leaders of this meeting with King were the aforementioned Horton and West, along with Abner Berry and James Dumbrowski, all open and acknowledged members of the Communist Party, USA. The agenda of the meeting was a plan to tour the Southern states to initiate demonstrations and riots.

From 1955 to 1960, Martin Luther King’s associate, advisor, and personal secretary was one Bayard Rustin. In 1936 Rustin joined the Young Communist League at New York City College. Convicted of draft-dodging, he went to prison for two years in 1944. On January 23, 1953 the Los Angeles Times reported his conviction and sentencing to jail for 60 days for lewd vagrancy and homosexual perversion. Rustin attended the 16th Convention of the Communist Party, USA in February, 1957. One month later, he and King founded the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, or SCLC for short. The president of the SCLC was Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. The vice-president of the SCLC was the Reverend Fred Shuttlesworth, who was also the president of an identified Communist front known as the Southern Conference Educational Fund, an organization whose field director, a Mr. Carl Braden, was simultaneously a national sponsor of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, of which you may have heard. The program director of the SCLC was the Reverend Andrew Young, in more recent years Jimmy Carter’s ambassador to the UN and mayor of Atlanta. Young, by the way, was trained at the Highlander Folk School, previously mentioned.

Soon after returning from a trip to Moscow in 1958, Rustin organized the first of King’s famous marches on Washington. The official organ of the Communist Party, The Worker, openly declared the march to be a Communist project. Although he left King’s employ as secretary in 1961, Rustin was called upon by King to be second in command of the much larger march on Washington which took place on August 28, 1964.

Bayard Rustin’s replacement in 1961 as secretary and advisor to King was Jack O’Dell, also known as Hunter Pitts O’Dell. According to official records, in 1962 Jack O’Dell was a member of the National Committee of the Communist Party, USA. He had been listed as a Communist Party member as early as 1956. O’Dell was also given the job of acting executive director for SCLC activities for the entire Southeast, according to the St. Louis Globe-Democrat of October 26, 1962. At that time, there were still some patriots in the press corps, and word of O’Dell’s party membership became known.

What did King do? Shortly after the negative news reports, King fired O’Dell with much fanfare. And he then, without the fanfare, immediately hired him again as director of the New York office of the SCLC, as confirmed by the Richmond News-Leader of September 27, 1963.

In 1963 a Black man from Monroe, North Carolina named Robert Williams made a trip to Peking, China. Exactly 20 days before King’s 1964 march on Washington, Williams successfully urged Mao Tse-Tung to speak out on behalf of King’s movement. Mr. Williams was also around this time maintaining his primary residence in Cuba, from which he made regular broadcasts to the southern United States, three times a week, from high-power AM transmitters in Havana under the title “Radio Free Dixie.” In these broadcasts, he urged violent attacks by Blacks against White Americans.

During this period, Williams wrote a book entitled Negroes With Guns. The writer of the foreword for this book? None other than “Martin Luther King, Jr.” It is also interesting to note that the editors and publishers of this book were to a man all supporters of the infamous Fair Play for Cuba Committee.

According to King’s biographer and sympathizer David J. Garrow, “King privately described himself as a Marxist.” In his 1981 book, The FBI and Martin Luther King, Jr., Garrow quotes King as saying in SCLC staff meetings, “…we have moved into a new era, which must be an era of revolution…. The whole structure of American life must be changed…. We are engaged in the class struggle.”

Jewish Communist Stanley Levison can best be described as King’s behind-the-scenes “handler.” Levison, who had for years been in charge of the secret funnelling of Soviet funds to the Communist Party, USA, was King’s mentor and was actually the brains behind many of King’s more successful ploys. It was Levison who edited King’s book, Stride Toward Freedom. It was Levison who arranged for a publisher. Levison even prepared King’s income tax returns! It was Levison who really controlled the fund-raising and agitation activities of the SCLC. Levison wrote many of King’s speeches. King described Levison as one of his “closest friends.”

FBI: King Bought Sex With SCLC Money

The Federal Bureau of Investigation had for many years been aware of Stanley Levison’s Communist activities. It was Levison’s close association with King that brought about the initial FBI interest in King.

Lest you be tempted to believe the controlled media’s lie about “racists” in the FBI being out to “get” King, you should be aware that the man most responsible for the FBI’s probe of King was Assistant Director William C. Sullivan. Sullivan describes himself as a liberal, and says that initially “I was one hundred per cent. for King…because I saw him as an effective and badly needed leader for the Black people in their desire for civil rights.” The probe of King not only confirmed their suspicions about King’s Communist beliefs and associations, but it also revealed King to be a despicable hypocrite, an immoral degenerate, and a worthless charlatan.

According to Assistant Director Sullivan, who had direct access to the surveillance files on King which are denied the American people, King had embezzled or misapplied substantial amounts of money contributed to the “civil rights” movement. King used SCLC funds to pay for liquor, and numerous prostitutes both Black and White, who were brought to his hotel rooms, often two at a time, for drunken sex parties which sometimes lasted for several days. These types of activities were the norm for King’s speaking and organizing tours.

In fact, an outfit called the “National Civil Rights Museum” in Memphis, Tennessee, which is putting on display the two bedrooms from the Lorraine Motel where King stayed the night before he was shot, has declined to depict in any way the occupants of those rooms. That—according to exhibit designer Gerard Eisterhold—would be “close to blasphemy.” The reason? “Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.” spent his last night on Earth having sexual intercourse with two women at the motel and physically beating and abusing a third.

Sullivan also stated that King had alienated the affections of numerous married women. According to Sullivan, who in 30 years with the Bureau had seen everything there was to be seen of the seamy side of life, King was one of only seven people he had ever encountered who was such a total degenerate.

Noting the violence that almost invariably attended King’s supposedly “non-violent” marches, Sullivan’s probe revealed a very different King from the carefully crafted public image. King welcomed members of many different Black groups as members of his SCLC, many of them advocates and practitioners of violence. King’s only admonition on the subject was that they should embrace “tactical nonviolence.”

Sullivan also relates an incident in which King met in a financial conference with Communist Party representatives, not knowing that one of the participants was an infiltrator actually working for the FBI.

J. Edgar Hoover personally saw to it that documented information on King’s Communist connections was provided to the President and to Congress. And conclusive information from FBI files was also provided to major newspapers and news wire services. But were the American people informed of King’s real nature? No, for even in the 1960s, the fix was in—the controlled media and the bought politicians were bound and determined to push their racial mixing program on America. King was their man and nothing was going to get in their way. With a few minor exceptions, these facts have been kept from the American people. The pro-King propaganda machine grinds on, and it is even reported that a serious proposal has been made to add some of King’s writings as a new book in the Bible.

Ladies and gentlemen, the purpose of this radio program is far greater than to prove to you the immorality and subversion of this man called King.

I want you to start to think for yourselves.

I want you to consider this: What are the forces and motivation behind the controlled media’s active promotion of King?

What does it tell you about our politicians when you see them, almost without exception, falling all over themselves to honor King as a national hero?

What does it tell you about our society when any public criticism of this moral leper and Communist functionary is considered grounds for dismissal?

What does it tell you about the controlled media when you see how they have successfully suppressed the truth and held out a picture of King that can only be described as a colossal lie?

You need to think, my fellow Americans. You desperately need to wake up.

__________________

Bibliography

1. Hoffman, Michael A., Holiday for a Cheater, (Wiswell Ruffin House, Dresden, New York, 1992)

2. Steffgen, Kent H., Bondage of the Free, (Vanguard Books, Berkeley, California, 1966)

3. Garrow, David J., The FBI and Martin Luther King, Jr., (W. W. Norton & Co, New York City, 1981)

Further information on King’s Communist connections and the FBI surveillance of Stanley Levison can be found in the Congressional Record.

The Attack on Pearl Harbor

by Kevin Alfred Strom

IF YOU WANT to understand why the American government supports Communists in Haiti and South Africa — if you want to understand why neither Democrats nor Republicans will protect our borders from alien invasion — and if you want to understand why we are rapidly losing our freedoms that our fathers and their fathers fought to defend — then you must gain an understanding of the events that took place over a few days’ span over a half century ago.

The truth about this incident of treason against the American people and betrayal of our fighting men is so shocking — and so revealing — that once heard, it will forever alter your view of our world and the forces that shape it. After hearing this broadcast, you will never be able to trust the controlled media again; and you will see with crystal clarity the hand of America’s enemies as they guide our government from disaster to disaster.

In the early morning of December 4th, 1941, at a US Navy shortwave monitoring station in Cheltenham, Maryland, a half-hour drive southeast of Washington, DC, senior radio operator Ralph Briggs was just coming on duty. Briggs was 27 years old, had been with the Navy since the age of 20, and had worked with Naval Intelligence monitoring foreign shortwave broadcasts for four years. He had been an amateur radio operator, callsign W9NCM, since he was a teenager.

It seemed like an ordinary morning, as he tuned his receiver to the station and began transcribing what he heard. At 8 a.m. he received the message he had been waiting for. It seemed to be nothing more than a regional weather forecast, the kind that the stations he monitored transmitted every day during their news broadcasts. But Briggs, alone among the radio operators at Cheltenham, knew what the three words meant. They meant that the world was going to change in unpredictable but cataclysmic ways. They meant that many of his friends and countrymen would soon be dead. They meant that America would never be the same again. The three words were casually spoken during the regular news and weather feature from Radio Tokyo, Japan. The words were “East Wind, Rain.” Briggs immediately teletyped the message to Washington.

“East Wind, Rain” was one of three possible “execute” messages which Japanese diplomats around the world had been alerted to begin listening for on November 19th. They were told to monitor the regular news and weather broadcasts from Tokyo, just as they always did, but to pay especially careful attention to the phraseology employed to describe the weather.

If they heard the words “North Wind, Cloudy,” it meant war with the Soviet Union.

If they heard the words “West Wind, Clear,” it meant war with the British Empire.

And if they heard the words “East Wind, Rain,” it meant war with the United States.

Just a few miles away from Cheltenham, in Washington, DC, at the Japanese embassy, Chief Petty Officer Kenici Ogemoto also was listening to the weather report. When he heard those fateful words, he immediately rushed into the office of the naval attache, Captain Yuzuru Sanematsu, and shouted “the winds blew.” Sanematsu ran with Ogemoto back into the radio room just in time to hear the Radio Tokyo announcer repeat the weather forecast, “Higashi no kaze ame” — “East Wind, Rain.” Instantly workers at the embassy began destroying their cryptographic equipment and codebooks, while others took the secret documents from their files, piled them in huge heaps in the garden, and burned them. The Japanese diplomats knew that their embassies and consulates in the United States and its territories would soon be seized; and they themselves would soon be interned as enemy aliens pending their exchange for American diplomats in Japan. All their code-making and code-breaking hardware and software, and all their secret papers, had to be destroyed immediately.

The regime governing the United States at that time was that of Franklin Roosevelt. It was the first presidential administration in the United States of which it can definitively be said that it was fully under alien control. Never before had so many subversive aliens and traitors, many of them out-and-out Communists, been ensconced in powerful positions; never before had the federal government increased its power over the states and the people to such an extent; never before — but often since.

To give you an idea of the true atmosphere of those times, which is assiduously hidden from you by establishment historians and was covered up by the controlled media of the time, let me relate a little incident recounted in John T. Flynn’s book, The Roosevelt Myth.

Eleanor Roosevelt

In 1939 a Communist youth group calling itself the “American Youth Congress” was being investigated by the House Un-American Activities Committee, headed by Congressman Martin Dies. A group of Communists from the “Congress,” including their leader Joseph P. Lash, Joe Cadden, and Abbot Simon, staged a series of protests against the investigation, at one point marching into the Committee room and attempting to disrupt the proceedings. They jumped over tables, shouted at the Congressmen, tossed Communist pamphlets about, and at one point Joseph Lash even began singing a foul and insulting song directed at Dies. Present at the time, and leading the assembled Communists in their protests, was none other than the wife of the President of the United States, Eleanor Roosevelt. Not only that, but the Communists had been chauffeured to their demonstration in official White House cars, and one of them, Lash, was living full-time at the White House, while Cadden and Simon were often boarders there.

A member of Congress, who had been an ardent Roosevelt supporter, visited the White House one morning. While there, he was amazed to see Abbot Simon, a board member of a well-known Communist front organization, emerge from one of the bedrooms. He asked the White House usher if he had really seen what he thought he had seen. The usher assured him that he had indeed, and that Simon had been occupying the bedroom for two weeks, sleeping each night in a bed formerly used by Abraham Lincoln.

In such an atmosphere it is not surprising that the Roosevelt government was anxious to enter the war on the side of the Soviets. Nor is it surprising that Jewish interests, which also figured large in the Roosevelt regime (and in all administrations since), were also zealous in their efforts to involve the United States in the war against Germany, which by that time had removed organized Jewish interests from their former positions of power in that country. Also, it should be noted that in the 1930s and 1940s, the Jewish and Communist power structures were largely congruent, there being large numbers of individuals belonging to both groups simultaneously. Two overlapping interest groups, both very influential in the White House, were pushing for war.

But the American people were solidly against war — so much so that when campaigning for his third term in November, 1940, while World War II raged in Europe and America was officially neutral, Roosevelt told the American people in a speech in Boston carried by radio and by wire services around the nation:

“I say to you fathers and mothers and I will say it to you again and again and again. Your boys will not be sent into foreign wars.”

Stalin, Roosevelt, and Soviet and Administration officials

In fact, one week before Pearl Harbor, polls showed the American people a solid 75 per cent. against war, despite the best efforts of Roosevelt and the controlled media’s hate propaganda.

As we have already mentioned on a previous American Dissident Voices broadcast, Roosevelt’s Secretary of War, Henry L. Stimson, entered in his diary two weeks before the attack on Pearl Harbor the fact that FDR had stated to his cabinet that his plan was to maneuver Japan into war without America firing the first shot. And that is exactly what he did. Among many other things, he instituted a trade embargo against Japan, starving that resource-poor nation of vital industrial materials.

The Roosevelt government knew the meaning of the “East Wind, Rain” message. They knew it because American and British intelligence were able to read the Japanese diplomatic code, and they had intercepted and read the message from the Japanese foreign ministry of November 19th, 1941, which instructed Japanese embassies and consulates to be listening for the “winds” execute messages on their shortwave receivers, and which explained the meaning of the messages in no uncertain terms.

The powerful transmitters of Radio Tokyo broadcast the “winds” execute message several times that day, and it was heard and understood not only by Naval Intelligence in Cheltenham, Maryland, but also by other US monitoring stations around the nation; by the monitoring station of the Australian Special Intelligence Organisation located near Melbourne, Australia; by the British Intelligence intercept station on Stonecutter’s Island, Hong Kong; and of course by Japanese diplomats around the world.

After Ralph Briggs had teletyped the “winds” message to Washington, it was quickly transmitted to Army Signals Intelligence and to the White House. The teletype equipment then in use at Cheltenham produced an original and a copy at the sending end, and two copies at the Washington end. Briggs also typed out another original and two carbon copies on a regular typewriter. These were all carefully filed.

Briggs was scheduled for weekend leave in Ohio the following Sunday, December 7, 1941. It was there that he received the initial news of the Japanese surprise attack on the US Pacific fleet at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. He, and the rest of the staff at Cheltenham, knew that war was imminent, but felt that America was forewarned and well prepared. He felt certain that the Japanese had fallen into a well-laid trap. In fact, the first and heavily censored news reports of the attack claimed that the Japanese had sunk only one “old battleship” and one destroyer, and that the Japanese had suffered heavy casualties. It was not too long before the truth came out, however, and Briggs and everyone else came to know what the Japanese commanders knew as they radioed back “Tora! Tora! Tora!,” meaning “Tiger! Tiger! Tiger!,” their signal indicating that the attack was successful and had been a complete surprise.

Ralph Briggs’ immediate superior was Chief Petty Officer Radioman Daryl Wigle. In a recent interview, Briggs says:

“When I came off of that weekend I had a chance to talk with Wigle, and I said ‘What happened?’ And he said, ‘I don’t know, all I can say is nobody’s talking,’ and that was the end of our conversation. No one knew anything. So I let it rest, as by then with war declared we were very busy. But in the next month, as we began to hear the real facts about our losses, that’s when I started looking back through our records for that ‘execute’ intercept and to see what I’d done with it.”

But Ralph Briggs found nothing in the files. Every copy of the “winds” message had mysteriously vanished.

On the 24th of September, 1941, the Army’s shortwave radio monitoring station at Oahu, Hawaii, intercepted a message from Tokyo to the Japanese consul, Nagao Kita, in Honolulu. This monitoring station’s job was to intercept all traffic to the Japanese consul there, and also all traffic on the Tokyo-Berlin and Tokyo-Moscow radio circuits. But none of the radio operators or codebreakers in Hawaii were cleared to decode the material — it was all sent on to Washington in encrypted form, exactly as received.

The message to Nagao Kita divided Pearl harbor up into several numbered target areas for an aerial attack and requested him to make a twice-weekly report to Tokyo on the vessels at anchor in Pearl Harbor and their exact locations. Never before had the Japanese asked for such attack plan information about any American military installation. The codebreakers in Washington knew the significance of this message — they even called it “The Bomb Plot Message.” Yet Washington did not pass this information along to the Army and Navy commanders in Hawaii. At least three messages about the bomb plan for Pearl Harbor passed between Tokyo and the Japanese consulate in Hawaii. All of them were read by Washington, the last that we know of on December 3d. None were passed along to the American commanders at Pearl Harbor.

The Roosevelt government not only were reading the Japanese diplomatic code, they were also reading the Japanese naval code. A strange twist of fate helped the American codebreakers just a few days before the attack. The Japanese naval code was normally changed every six months. After each change, it took the British and American codebreakers a few weeks to crack the new code. The next change date was December 1st, but due to the fact that some Japanese naval communication units had not yet received their new code books in time, the date for the code change was pushed back to December 4th, thus giving our codebreakers valuable extra days of Japanese naval intelligence.

The Japanese also made the error after December 4th of communicating with some units, who still hadn’t received their code tables, in the old code while at the same time sending the same messages to others in the new. Slips like this are a codebreaker’s fondest dream, and greatly speeded the process of cracking the new code.

Washington knew through reading the Japanese naval traffic that all Japanese merchant vessels were to return to their home waters by December 7th. This information was not given to the commanders at Pearl Harbor. Washington knew through reading the Japanese naval traffic that a huge task force, including a large group of aircraft carriers, was sailing into the Pacific on November 26th for an eight-day voyage and was to reach its standby position and refuel on December 4th. Washington also knew that there was no possible target in the Pacific that required the use of carrier-borne aircraft except Pearl Harbor. This information was not given to the commanders at Pearl Harbor.

On the 27th of November, Washington learned through the Dutch attaché in Washington (who had also received a decrypt of the Japanese naval message ordering the task force to sea from his own intelligence men in the Dutch East Indies) that the task force’s most likely direction was east and that its most likely target was Pearl Harbor. This information was not passed along to the American commanders at Pearl Harbor.

And on December 2d, the day after which the naval code would normally have been changed, Washington intercepted and read the message giving the date for the attack. “Climb Mount Niitakayama 1208.” Mount Niitakayama was then the highest mountain in the Japanese Empire and was the code word for the attack, and 12-8 Japanese time is 12-7 Hawaiian time. This message was also intercepted and read by British intelligence, who concluded, according to one of their number, W. W. Mortimer of the British Far East Combined Bureau, that since no task force had been sighted in waters south of Japan, the only target that fitted the length of voyage, midocean refueling, and the inclusion of aircraft carriers was Pearl Harbor, and that an attack on Sunday, December 7, (the date given in the Japanese message) would offer the greatest element of surprise there. This information was passed along to Washington, who, once again, did nothing to warn the commanders at Pearl Harbor.

The USS Arizona going down at Pearl Harbor

Ladies and gentlemen, only in the last few years has the information obtained by the breaking of the Japanese naval codes been available to the public. But even the limited knowledge we had earlier of the decryption of the diplomatic codes was enough to indicate to any reasonable man that Franklin Roosevelt and the men around him should have been tried for treason and for the betrayal of every American fighting man — not only those who died on that fateful day of December 7th, 1941, but every one who died or was maimed for life in that entire suicidal and fratricidal conflict called World War Two.

Until 1990, the United States government refused to admit that the Japanese naval code even existed, much less had been broken. But now leaks uncovered by diligent researchers have finally thrown aside the curtain. The governments of the US and Britain still keep a tight lid of secrecy on important aspects of the Pearl Harbor story. Many documents are missing from the records of the period. Some have been altered. What we do have is so damning, though, that no further confirmation of the essentials is necessary. When a patriotic administration takes power someday in Washington, the declassification of all records of the treason of the Roosevelt regime will fill in the details of this story, and no doubt other crimes will be uncovered. But on this we are certain: the administration knew, at the very highest level, what was going to happen at Pearl Harbor. They wanted it to happen, because they wanted America to go to war against Germany. Since Germany would not do anything to justify an American declaration of war, despite Roosevelt’s secret war against Germany in the Atlantic and his multiple provocations and violations of American neutrality, Roosevelt was forced to provoke Japan, which was Germany’s ally. Roosevelt and his henchmen cared so little for the lives of American soldiers, and so much for their plan to get us into the war, that they chose not to warn our commanders at Pearl Harbor. Roosevelt wanted the Americans at Pearl Harbor to suffer a horrible defeat so that the outrage of the American people at Japan would induce the 75 per cent. of the American people who had been against the war to willingly become cannon fodder in a war against the interests of America and the West. And in this he was entirely successful.

I have only been able to relate to you a tiny portion of the story of Pearl Harbor in this half hour. The events of December 7th, 1941 were pivotal to the subsequent history of our nation and civilization. An understanding of those events will deepen your understanding of our nation’s current plight.

___________________________________________

For further reading on the subject of the betrayal of Pearl Harbor, see Infamy by historian John Toland and Betrayal at Pearl Harbor by British intelligence experts Rusbridger and Nave. For an excellent synopsis of the causes of America’s decline see What We Owe Our Parasites by Dr. R. P. Oliver.

© 1999 Kevin Alfred Strom, All Rights Reserved.

Send me email if you have any questions about this page.