God Helps Those Who Help Themselves: The Beginnings of White Victimization in Multicultural America, Part 2

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… Don’t Go Back!

“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.