Needed: Real Independence
People
who throw away their own independence and freedom lose the ability to
control their government. And soon it is no longer their government any
more.
American Dissident Voices broadcast for July 2, 2006
by Kevin Alfred Strom
 |
HAPPY INDEPENDENCE DAY. I'm a positive person, and there is hope,
so I kept the "happy" in there -- even though there's a lot to be unhappy about this Fourth of July, 2006; mainly three things: our people's loss
of independence; our failure to understand what "independence" is; and
-- worst of all -- our failure to even know who we are.
So get out those made-in-China fireworks and whoop it up, if you
want to. I don't care if you do or you don't. I know your children
probably like fireworks. But don't ever forget what this day stands
for. One Hell of a lot of people suffered and died for the independence
the foolish and the stupid are throwing away. Spend one hour studying
and thinking about what independence really means, one hour out of 24. And share what you learn with your children. Let's start now.
The U.S. Congress recently went into convulsions over the renewal of the 1965 "Voting Rights Act." The Voting Rights Act,
signed by President Lyndon Johnson, was one of many anti-White and
anti-American initiatives that took place that year: It was the year
our borders were opened and our pro-White immigration laws were
scrapped, for example.
The purpose of the Voting Rights Act was
to dismantle every state and local law -- such as literacy tests --
that tended to favor White voters. Certain counties -- and even whole
states -- had to submit every voter registration or district boundary
change to the federal government in Washington before it could be
approved. In some areas, the federal Department of Justice moved in and
controlled everything, shouldering local officials aside. How did the
Act determine which areas "needed" federal control and which didn't? As
we published recently on http://v-news.org one of the sections up for
renewal is "a requirement that any state or county with a history of
favoring White interests get pre-approval from the U.S. Justice
Department or a federal court before they change their election laws or
procedures."
That's right. Federal control kicks in if the multiracialist
bureaucrats decide that a state or county has "a history of favoring
White interests." If officials favor non-White interests, no problem.
If they favor Blacks or Mestizos or even illegals -- no problem. But if
the bureaucrats decide they've ever favored Whites or favor Whites now,
that must be stopped. It's easy to see where this Act has led and will
continue to lead: Voter registration rules must be written and district
boundaries must be drawn -- and every other jot and tittle of
regulation must be crafted -- to increase non-White representation and decrease that of Whites. It's a one-way ratchet, dispossessing White people of representation. As our http://v-news.org staff stated:
'Enacted by the 89th Congress, the Voting Rights Act was aimed at
thwarting the efforts of Whites to protect their race's interests in
states that had large Black minorities. As different, and in many ways unequal,
races, Whites and Blacks have necessarily diverging interests, making
racial conflict inevitable in any society in which both races live in
large numbers.
'This antagonism was created by the granting of citizenship to
former slaves following the Civil War, and was foreseen years earlier
by Thomas Jefferson, who anticipated the sort of conflicts that would
result from attempts to equalize the races, of which the Voting Rights
Act is but one of many examples.
'A member of the American Colonization Society, the third President
advocated the colonization of freed slaves outside of the United
States. To the objections of the egalitarians of his time, he replied
in words that now seem hauntingly prophetic.
'"It will probably be asked," Jefferson wrote, "Why not retain and
incorporate the blacks into the state, and thus save the expense of
supplying, by importation of white settlers, the vacancies they will
leave? Deep rooted prejudices entertained by the whites; ten thousand
recollections, by the blacks, of the injuries they have sustained; new
provocations; the real distinctions which nature has made; and many
other circumstances, will divide us into parties, and produce
convulsions, which will probably never end but in the extermination of
the one or the other race."
'More than forty years have now passed since Lyndon Johnson signed
the Voting Rights Act into law. In that period of time, the U.S.
Congress has perversely favored the interests of the Black race at the
expense of the interests of the race of most of its members. Jewish
domination of the means by which information is disseminated to the
American people -- a development never envisioned by Jefferson -- has
made many of them afraid to do otherwise.
'This fear has been the decisive factor in Black ascendancy over
the past two generations, which has necessarily taken place at White
expense. The "convulsions" that Jefferson predicted have not yet ended,
and America's present demographic trends are such that if her leaders
do not soon begin to heed his words, the race in whose extermination
they will end will be ours.'
What Jefferson wanted -- and what the pre-"Voting Rights Act" laws tried to secure for us -- was independence.
White Americans fought hard for independence. Independence as a people.
A people with a shared ancestry, shared history, shared language, and
shared culture. (White Americans are every bit as much a people as
Frenchmen or Britons or Palestinians or any other people you care to
name. And it's not place of residence that makes you a member of a
people -- if that were true, a mouse in a stable would be a horse, and
Mexican Mestizos would be Americans. It's all the things I mentioned,
but mainly it's your ancestry that makes you what you are and which
determines the content of your culture.)
White Americans fought hard for independence from the British
Empire in the Revolutionary War. We wanted to make our own decisions.
We wanted those decisions to be made based on what was good for us, not
what was good for a far-away dynasty (which, by the way, utilized lots
of non-White labor and also countenanced the virtual slavery of White
people). Everybody knows we celebrate that independence on July 4th.
But those men who imposed literacy tests and other measures in the
South to keep the fecund non-White mob from controlling the political
process were also working to keep decision-making power in the hands of
our people. So were Jefferson and the other Founders of the American
Republic when they made sure that only Whites were counted as citizens
-- and that only Whites could become citizens, too. They didn't
hand out ballots to Amerindian tribesmen. They didn't hand over
citizenship rights and political power to Africans. They didn't open
the border to aliens and stand there, offering them jobs -- and green
cards -- and taxpayer's money -- and amnesty for breaking our laws --
and even the right to change our laws. No. That would have been absurd.
That would have been the diametric opposite of what the Founders had
been fighting for. That would have been giving up our independence.
That would have been giving up our right as a people to have our own
government just for us -- a government by White Americans, for White
Americans, and of White Americans. That is the essence of
independence. That is the essence of what the Founders created when
they created America. That is the essence of what our soldiers died
for. That is the essence of what made America great.
The Founding Fathers were White separatists almost to a man, and
the Republic they founded was, albeit imperfectly, a White separatist
nation until the subverters really took control in the 1960s.
The subverters used their radio and television networks and newspapers and publishing houses to convince us that not giving away our nation to non-Whites -- that
not giving away our independence and self-government -- was "hate" and
"evil." But wanting one's own people to have its own government and its
own nation -- and wanting one's own people to survive -- does not necessarily entail "hate" of other peoples or other races. Why should it?
The truth is that racial hatred is greatly increased by the forced association inherent in a multiracial society, as our newspapers amply show.
Where the races have their freedom and independence there is
very little hatred involved. Do the Danes hate the Japanese, or the
Guatemalan Indians the Bushmen of South Africa? I don't think so. But
drop 1,000,000 Danes in Osaka -- or 500,000 Bushmen in Quetzaltenango
-- and I think you'd see some real problems.
The author of the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson,
was a lifelong racial separatist who not only did not want integration,
but who actually wanted Africans to be relocated to another continent
entirely.
Those who control the media are desperate to revise Jefferson so
that they won't have to eject him from the American pantheon, though The Atlantic floated the idea (proposed by tired old establishment warhorse Conor
Cruise O'Brien) that Jefferson be evicted from his place of honor in
American history because Jefferson's philosophy is incompatible with
"multiracial democracy." And so it is!
O'Brien states "It follows that there can be no room for a cult of
Thomas Jefferson in the civil religion of an effectively multiracial
America -- that is, an America in which nonwhite Americans have a
significant and increasing say. Once the facts are known, Jefferson is
of necessity abhorrent to people who would not be in America at all if
he could have had his way." And WorldNet Daily conservative "star" Richard Grenier said in the Washington Times that Jefferson was comparable to Heinrich Himmler, and declared that
the Jefferson Memorial should be demolished stone by stone.
Throughout his public life, Jefferson held true to his concept of humane racial separation which he summed up in his Notes on the State of Virginia (1781, Query XIV):
Among the Romans emancipation required but one effort. The slave,
when made free, might mix with, without staining the blood of his
master. But with us a second is necessary, unknown to history. When
freed, he is to be removed beyond the reach of mixture
Removed beyond
the reach of mixture! And, it goes without saying, granted his own
independence in a distant land for the express purpose of preserving our independence. No wonder the multiracialists who have taken over
conservatism want Jefferson's memorial torn down brick by brick. If
you're near Washington, I suggest you lay a laurel there this week.
But multiracialists, some of them malicious and some of them
"equality" lunatics -- and greedy businessmen who wanted cheap labor --
prevented the repatriation idea from ever really getting anywhere. The
millions of freed slaves and their descendants stayed in America (and
are now being supplemented by even more non-White "cheap labor" invaders).
Some of the old Anglo elite treated their own people like garbage,
and continue to do so -- particularly in their enthusiastic (or
pretendedly enthusiastic) embrace of the new-money Jews' multiracial
imperative.
The "colonization," as the relocations of freed slaves were then
called, began in the early 19th century, under the sponsorship of many
prominent men. Their efforts were enough to create Liberia and its
capital city, named for one of the backers, James Monroe. But they
never really made a dent in the African population of the United
States, probably because too many people would have to stop getting
rich if the old apple-cart was upset.
One writer commented "It may be that business owners profited by
having multiple races in competition for limited numbers of jobs. If
so, the boobs are stuck with a multiracial mess that these businessmen
started over 300 years ago, and from which they profited until enough
of their spoiled, Harvard-educated kids decided it was 'immoral' just a
few decades ago. In any event, part of the latter's program is a
Newspeak that makes frank discussions of race impossible, and results
in media lies and establishment hypocrisy on a scale undreamt of by the
yellowest journalists of the last century."
The media -- or, more properly, the ethnic establishment which
controls them -- are far more passionately multiracialist than was the
old-money elite which was frankly divided on the issue.
That part of the old elite which wanted multiracialism wanted it
only as a way to get rich. The new elite uses multiracialism, including
the college-educated dupes who "believe" in it, as a way to destroy all
obstacles to their complete power over the Earth -- and the genocide by
amalgamation of the European and other races is one of their most
ardent desires.
Some of the old-money elite probably had convinced themselves that any harm to the race caused by their importation of stoop labor was far-off, minimal, and correctable. But the new elite has made a
religion out of multiracialism, a religion in which actions which tend
to racial preservation are defined as "evil," and actions which tend to
racial destruction are defined as "good."
No people with such an inverted "morality" will long survive on Earth.
People who throw away their own independence and freedom lose the
ability to control their government. And soon it is no longer their
government any more. It becomes just an association of self-interested
liars who extract the highest price possible for whatever betrayal they
can get away with and still retain the favor of the media. And that is
how nations fall, ladies and gentlemen.
I love my people. I don't want to see White America die. I don't
want to see the White West die. I don't want to see the uniquely noble
and beautiful race which brought us everything from grey-eyed Athena to
the Saturn V rocket go extinct, whether the genocide occurs by
"legally" forced "integration" or by mass killings. That's wrong, if
anything is wrong.
And don't kid yourself -- that's where we are headed, at a little
more than 10 per cent. of the Earth's population and falling fast, and
with the elite purposely importing hundreds of millions of
non-Europeans into our territories and using their media to promote a
fallacious "morality" in which opposing our genocide is somehow "evil."
If the spotted owl deserves a territory of its own where its
survival as a genetic type is assured, then so does the European race.
It is clear to me that Blacks, Mestizos, Asians, and others, not
being as soft in the brain on this topic as the befuddled Whites,
identify openly with their respective races, and form organizations
almost without number to advance their interests (a fact which is
easily verifiable by a glance at the Encyclopedia of Associations).
When Whites do this, in most countries in the West, they are vilified
by the billionaire media elites, when they are not actually arrested or
killed.
But White men and women, even those who are as multiracialist as
you can get without actually being off your rocker, keep moving away
from the Brown Tide.
You can find them all over the Pacific Northwest, refugees from
what used to be California. They will sometimes tell you in cautious,
looking-over-the-shoulder tones, about how "crime" or "crowding" made
southern California "unlivable." A very few will dispense with the code
words, but most cannot.
They are obeying their feelings, deep feelings among the men and
women of our race, feelings that call for open space and green fields
and splashing water, and the piping sounds and bright faces of White
children playing in the glen; not unlike the scenes that must have
filled the countryside while the Parthenon was being raised on a hill
in Hellas long ago.
Our people instinctively want freedom and independence. We want -- and we desperately need -- a place for ourselves, a place where the government belongs to us
and us alone, a place where our children can be safe and where no other
group's interests will come before their interests, a place where the
power is in our own hands, a place where our culture, our science, our
music, our art, our dreams will be allowed to live and develop as
Nature intended, without deformation or interference from others. On
this Independence Day 2006, please share these ideas with your family
and friends. Maybe next month you can attend a National Vanguard
meeting and meet other White families who share your concerns and your
values. I hope you do. We need to support each other. We need our own
media that never stop broadcasting the message that we want our independence back. That's what we're working for every day at National Vanguard.
We White Americans stand at a threshold. We are still the
overwhelming majority in this country. But we're falling fast. We have
a very brief window of opportunity in which we can get our independence
back and restore our freedom. That window of opportunity is called your life, because you're living right now. And I'm living right now. Let's get together and do something positive -- right now.
* *
* *
[Editor's Note: Please see latest contact information below]. We need your support. You can join or donate by writing to our
postal address below, or you can also donate through Paypal by sending
funds via
http://revilo-oliver.com/nvdonations.htm
We can have a clean, orderly, progressive, safe, and incomparably richer and more beautiful nation if it becomes a proud White nation again.
To do that we must begin by restoring White community and White
racial consciousness among our people. We at National Vanguard are
doing that by building world-beating new media for Whites and by
getting out on the street and meeting our neighbors and showing them
what we're all about.
We're going to help our people. We're going to educate our people.
We're going to come up with creative ways to awaken our people. We're
going to create publications that will be like nothing ever seen before
in the cause of White awakening. We're going to do what it takes.
Be a part of what we're doing. Join National Vanguard today. For
further information on National Vanguard, write to Post Office Box
5145, Charlottesville VA 22905, or visit http://www.nationalvanguard.org/ and click on the "join" link at the top of the page. We appreciate your support.
Until next week, this is Kevin Alfred Strom reminding you of the
words of Richard Berkeley Cotten: Freedom is not free; free men are not
equal; and equal men are not free.
|
at
the Battle of Cowpens, S. Carolina, 1781