|
|
|
God Helps Those Who
Help Themselves: The Beginnings of
White Victimization
in Multicultural America
Edmund Connelly
March 4, 2010
This Jewish-led media
assault deserves more attention as a cause of Whites' failure to stand up for
themselves. An explanation I respect appeared in
Race and the American
Prospect, edited by the late Sam Francis. Titled “Race
and Religion: A Catholic View,” the essay was written by New Yorker Richard
Faussette. Though Faussette situates his arguments in the Old Testament, his
analysis is a sociological one in the mold of evolutionary psychologist Kevin
MacDonald’s theory on
group evolutionary
strategies.
Faussette’s analysis goes
back to biblical times when Jews of that era implemented a system of niche
recovery to compensate for their partial displacement by the Assyrians.
Faussette sees this system as being anachronistically employed to this day:
Our enemies are not Assyrians. They are the agents
of the global economy; ethnic elites (their borders are where their people are)
colluding with our own managerial elites. Mesmerized by the prospect of
fantastic incomes, they are centralizing the world’s economy and abandoning
local loyalties for a “citizenship” of the world. Unable to conquer us
militarily, they have succeeded in engaging our armed forces around the world as
they repopulate our urban centers and our law enforcement agencies with an alien
elite and an alien underclass rigorously conditioned by the media.
Should we surrender to this
program, we will suffer what Moses prophesized: “You will become a horror, a
byword, an object lesson to all the
peoples amongst whom the Lord disperses you.”
Though some see the system
of importing foreign populations as a lapse in judgment, Faussette claims that
“the system is not broken. It has been re-engineered by private interests and
liberal ideologues, lobbying our elected representatives to increase the flow of
cheap labor and anything else they can profitably get over the border.”
If this system is not
broken, who built it and for what purposes? In essence, the goal is to displace
White Americans with non-Whites, and, in particular, to replace White elites
with Jews. In this struggle with non-Jewish leaders, Jews have at least two
choices: they can either massacre or expel their rivals, as they did in Russia
during the Revolution.
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
summed up the process during the Bolshevik Revolution, when the
executed army officers were Russians, the noblemen,
priests, monks, deputies were Russians. . . . In 1920s, the
pre-revolutionary engineers and scientists were exiled or killed. They were
Russians, while their place was taken by Jews. The best Russian Psychiatric
institute in Moscow, its Russian members were arrested or exiled, while their
place was taken by the Jews. Important Jewish doctors blocked the advancement of
Russian medical scientists. The best intellectual and artistic elites of Russian
people were killed, while the Jews grew and flourished in these (deadly for
Russians) years.
More confirmation can be
found in Yuri Slezkine’s exposé, The Jewish Century. Kevin
MacDonald later isolated the anti-Christian eliminationist focus of the
Bolshevik attack, which can be found in his review of Slezkine called “Stalin’s
Willing Executioners?” (See
here and
here.) Chillingly, Slezkine
quotes Leonard Schapiro’s comment that “anyone who had the misfortune to fall
into the hands of the Cheka stood a very good chance of finding himself
confronted with and possibly shot by a Jewish investigator.”
Circumstances in America
today are of course different than in Russia then, so a new approach is
necessary. Often cloaked as “anti-racism,” this program of dispossession begins
with ideological attacks. Given the vast power of modern media, Jews have
naturally turned to it as a means of control, and the fracturing of native
populations through use of the media is central to this. Faussette makes this
point with respect to the indigenous White population’s loss of the media:
If the majority of European American Christians
held the most lucrative niches in American society, the media would be unable to
depict us as a cruel and “intolerant” majority whose niches rightfully belong to
the victims of “White hatred and oppression.” The very fact that the media
vilification of the European American Christian majority goes on apace is proof
positive that people who identify with us and have a concern for our welfare are
no longer in the ascendancy. There may be many more of us, it is true, but we no
longer occupy the elite niches in which power is centralized. Even our ability
to depict a positive image of ourselves to our own populations and to the
peoples of the world has been wrested from us by the hands of powerful and
persistent detractors.
Faussette then drives home the point:
It is not enough to say that the broadcast media
are powerful. They create a separate and caustic virtual reality, then broadcast
that ideologically driven reality into the homes of millions of people and dare
to suggest that their horrific depiction of us is an accurate reflection of who
we really are, what we really do and what our history has really been. We are so
saturated with the propaganda many of us can no longer tell the difference
between ideology and reality, nor are we the only ones upon whom this burden of
a separate “reality” has been imposed. By the time an alien crosses our porous
borders he has been conditioned by the international media to believe that the
indigenous “White people” are recent interlopers on their own land; noxious
bigots who stole the land from the noble people who were here before them.
Millions of people are fed these overt and subliminal messages every day via
continuous media broadcasts.
The parallels with the
propaganda techniques of the Communist Soviet Union, particularly in the early
days, are manifest, as Faussette
explains:
“Demonizing an indigenous majority population to turn competing minority
populations against them is a genocidal tactic with recent historical
precedent.” Like the “former classes” slated for elimination in Russia, the
American majority is now the targeted class.
The use of terror was
prescribed then and is again being used, though “many of us seem oblivious to
what is going on here and
now.” The terror comes through the
educational and media propagation of the notion that indigenous White Christians
are the villain class. Or, if one prefers Jewish intellectual Susan Sontag’s
version, “The White race is the cancer of human history.” Operating under the
pretext that they are fighting for universal civil rights, Jewish activists in a
sense become the current equivalent of the Jews in Russia who were “Stalin’s
willing executioners,” though removed by one degree through their use of
non-Whites as the trigger men.
An integral part of this
terror involves ritual public humiliation, another key aspect of the media’s
strategy to demoralize the American majority. First and foremost is the public
dissemination of the message that Whites are “powerless to deflect the media
barrage of humiliation and vilification of our race, our various ethnicities,
our Christian religion and the nation’s history.” Whites must now live quietly
with the knowledge that infamies committed against them warrant no notice in the
public eye, while any assault by an individual White on a designated minority
group will result in ritual condemnation of not only the assailant but the
broader majority culture as well.
It was never just “in the
air” that the media, schools and legal system would take the turn they did in
the 1960s against the American majority. Rather, it is the result of
Jewish movements, as Kevin MacDonald made clear in a
column
on this site last year:
For nearly 100 years Whites have been subjected to
a
culture of
critique emanating from the most prestigious academic and
media institutions. . . . But that implies that the submerged White identity of
the White working class and the lack of cultural confidence exhibited by the
rest of White America are imposed from outside. Although there may well be
characteristics of Whites that facilitate this process, this
suppression of White identity and interests is certainly not the natural outcome
of modernization or any other force internal to Whites as a people. In my
opinion, they are the result of the successful erection of a
culture of critique in the West dominated by Jewish intellectual and
political movements. . . .
Faussette (see also his
companion piece
here)
draws the same dark conclusion:
Consider for a moment the campaign of demonization
of the European American Christian majority and its culture that we see in the
media, academia and legislated from the bench. What if this campaign mirroring
the public vilification employed by ardent and merciless communist regimes is
completely successful here in North America, not now perhaps, but in a
generation or two, something for our grandchildren to inherit?
Imagine an economic downturn of Blackouts, food
shortages and riots in which all law enforcement niches are filled by
media-molded unassimilated immigrants and indigenous psychologically prepared
minorities; law enforcement personnel conditioned to believe that the people
they’re sworn to protect are noxious bigots who deserve the violence they
suffer.
Make no mistake, we White
Christians in America are being effectively removed from our lands.
The conclusion here is not a rosy one: America today is in a position analogous
to the one in early Soviet Russia. Two key similarities are “the rise of the
Jews” and the hatred of and hostility directed toward the majority Gentile
populations of both states.
Tomislav Sunic has written about this analogy in terms of “Twin Brothers: Homo
sovieticus and Homo americanus.” To be sure, “Americanism” has been far more
successful in attaining voluntary compliance to the will of the state, infused
as it is with a “fun ideology.” Given the choice, humans worldwide would choose
the same, though both the Soviet and (postmodern) American version lead to the
grave: “Certainly, communism kills the body, in contrast to Americanism which
kills the soul, but even the worst type of intellectual ‘soft-killing’ in the
postmodern American system seems to be dearer to the masses than physical
maltreatment or a violent communist death.”
In point of fact, of course, the (current) American version of soft
totalitarianism is not so “fun,” though we are misled because it is a regime
“maintained less by brute force than by an unrelenting, enormously
sophisticated, and massively effective campaign to constrain political and
cultural activity within very narrow boundaries.” A violent communist death is
not yet necessary because dissenters “are not yet trundled off to jail or beaten
with truncheons, but are quietly ignored and marginalized. Or they are held up
to public disgrace, and, wherever possible, removed from their livelihood,” as
MacDonald noted in the Foreword to Sunic’s book.
Fair enough; the avoidance of physical terror and the bestowal of the
therapeutic state have made rule easier.But in the end this “fun-infested
ideology” still leads to “warm death.” In any case, it may soon turn “hot.”
Sunic, for one, sees dark clouds on the horizon for any group in America that
might be targeted: “Thus, in order for the proper functioning of future
Americanized society, the removal of millions of surplus citizens must become a
social and possibly also an ecological necessity.” MacDonald identifies what
sectors might be targeted “and therefore worthy of mass murder by the American
counterparts of the Jewish elite in the Soviet Union—the ones who journeyed to
Ellis Island instead of Moscow.” They are the European-derived Whites populating
vast areas of the American nation, particularly in the so-called “red states.”
Let’s get back to James Edwards’ account of the brutal murders of White students
at Kent State. Why have things come to this? Why don’t students, professors,
parents and administrators care if they are at immediate risk of DYING? Not just
being robbed or roughed up, but being barbarically beaten to death, often for no
other reason than fun?
Why don’t far more people see how horribly corrupt and degenerate America is today? As just one example among thousands, consider a recent cover of Vogue magazine featuring NBA star LeBron James with supermodel Gisele Bundchen, photographed by Jewish celebrity photographer Annie Leibowitz. The mainstream media worried that it evoked illiberal racial stereotypes — Beauty and the Beast, King Kong and Fay Wray, etc. But it can also be seen as the triumph and legitimization of an unrefined, tattooed Black male seething with raw physical power who possesses a paragon of White womanhood, the latter quite obviously enjoying the experience.
In other words, an image of Black ascendancy and White emasculation as imagined by a famous Jewish artist (and lover of Susan Sontag, a well-known Jewish intellectual whose anti-White sentiments are legendary; see below).
Edgar J. Steele took it
upon himself to catalog examples of anti-White attitudes among mainstream Black
and Jewish figures in
an insightful essay
some years back:
If You See Black…
"Keep bashing the dead White males, and the live
ones, and the females, too, until the social construct known as the White race
is destroyed. Not deconstructed, but destroyed." — Noel Ignatiev, Jewish
Harvard professor and editor of Race
Traitor magazine (Washington Times,
September 4, 2002)
"The White race is the cancer of human history." —
Susan Sontag (much-celebrated Jewish "intellectual," whose recent passing
was lamented loudly in Jewish circles)
"I don’t care about your idiot children." — Willie
Brown (Mayor of San Francisco, to a white parent complaining that affirmative
action would penalize his children), quoted in
The Social Contract (Summer 1998, p. 290)
"It's always illegitimate for White men to organize
as White men." — William Raspberry (Black columnist), Dubiously Exclusive,
(Washington Post, Nov. 24, 1995)
"Q: What kind of world do you want to leave
to your children?
A:
A world in which there aren't any white people. . . ." — Leonard Jeffries
(chairman of the African-American studies department of the City College of New
York), interviewed by T.L. Stanclu and Nisha Mohammed,
Rutherford Magazine (May 1995, p. 13)
"You guys have been
practicing discrimination for years. Now it is our turn." —
Black Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall (in a conversation with Justice
William Douglas about racial preferences, quoted by William O. Douglas,
The Court Years, 1939–1975 (New York,
Random House, 1980)
Steele nicely pairs Jews and Blacks in their decades-long offensive against
Whites. It may have started modestly, but on each and every day, we can find
examples in America (and throughout much of the rest of the world) where Whites
are being humiliated, abused, raped and murdered. And yet, by and large, we take
it lying down.
This is insane. It goes against every natural impulse. It is a sign of more than
just a loss of backbone. At worst, it signals the coming end of the White race.
Those of us who write in venues such as this know the score. But we still must
do more to impress upon others the clear and present danger we face. I know our
society is vastly sick and by extension, so are most people.
But we’ve got to break the spell Whites are under. We’ve got to restore their normal sense of group identification and self preservation. Ben Franklin, after all, got it right when he wrote, “God helps those who help themselves.” Whites of the world, by all means, start helping yourselves!
Edmund Connelly
(email him) is a freelance
writer, academic, and expert on the cinema arts. He has previously written for
The Occidental
Quarterly.
