William Pierce (and Me) on Racism

In 2001, I published a book on the White advocate William Pierce (1933–2002) called The Fame of a Dead Man’s Deeds.  Given the obsessive concern currently for what is deemed the unimpeachable evil of White racism and the modern-day inquisition against White racists tainted with this sin, I think it would be useful to re-visit what Pierce had to say about this topic in the Fame book two decades ago and see what it brings up for you.

*    *     *

Pierce believes that over the past forty or fifty years [this is 2001, remember] white people have been conditioned to feel guilty about their natural inclinations around race.  The media in particular, but also the schools, politicians, and mainstream churches, have waged an all-out campaign to get them to deny their natural—and healthy—impulses.

What are these natural racial impulses or inclinations?   In order to get at that, Pierce offers that we must examine the way whites thought and behaved before the conditioning program began.

In times past, most whites accepted the fact that people of a particular race preferred to live and work and play with others like themselves.  White people were curious about other races. They would study the lore of the Indians, for example.  Indeed, whites found much to admire in other races and cultures—Chinese art for example. Still, they retained a sense of separateness and exclusiveness and pride in their own European heritage, in their own racial characteristics. They didn’t feel it necessary to apologize for teaching the history of their own race to their children, that is to say, European history.  They didn’t feel the need to balance things out by giving equal treatment to other races and cultures. They left Japanese and Tibetan history to the scholars in those fields.  They certainly didn’t feel a conciliatory obligation to invent a false black history to elevate the self-esteem of blacks or to persuade young whites that blacks were their cultural equals.

Did whites feel their race was superior to other races? In general, yes, they did, says Pierce, which is not to say that they were blind to the fact that other races and cultures could do some things very well, and in some cases were better than whites were at things. But whites valued what they were good at, and so by the standards they set up, they looked very good to themselves. They were confident in their abilities and accomplishments as thinkers and problem solvers and civilization builders. They liked their literature and art best. They valued their way of life—their concept of virtue and morality and their approach to family and work and so on.

Basically, they believed they had a superior culture and superior race. In that sense, they were what today would be called white supremacists. But they were not alone in feeling that way; it is natural for a people to think their ways are the best, that they are the best.  The Chinese have historically believed that they are superior to the “foreign devils.”   That the Chinese thought that way didn’t bother whites. It didn’t threaten whites’ sense of their worth, their sense of their place in the world.

Pierce argues that an outgrowth of people’s natural feelings of racial identification and favoritism is to segregate themselves from other people, to live among their own in the ways they prefer.  That is their normal impulse.  That way of living has been typical throughout the history of humankind.  It may seem a good idea for people to live mixed up with other peoples, but it doesn’t work as well as we have been told that it does, and it isn’t inherently a superior or a more elevated way to live.  Living amid so-called diversity is not the only legitimate, morally acceptable, way to live, and hardly an urgent moral imperative.   It is only in recent years that whites have been pressured to think in those terms.

World War II brought big changes in this pattern of thought and conduct, says Pierce. Those who wanted Germany destroyed painted it as a war for democracy and equality.  As the narrative went, the Germans believed in a master race while we believed in the equality of the races.  This rationale brought increased stress on an equality theme in American life in contrast to an emphasis on the qualitative differences among individuals and groups.  The idea of the equality of whites and blacks went along with that theme. From the assumption that blacks were equal to whites, it followed that if blacks were observed to accomplish less or conduct themselves less admirably, something external to them must be causing it. And that cause was identified—white oppression. Whites must have made blacks the way they were.

While white villainy seemed to make sense given the false notion of racial equality, it simply didn’t square with the facts. The vast majority of whites didn’t concern themselves with blacks and wasted no time trying to suppress them. The vast majority of whites didn’t care what blacks did. They simply wanted to go their way and let blacks go theirs. But the facts of the matter aren’t what is important. What is important is to understand that World War II served to heighten the belief that if blacks had any problems at all, they could be laid at the feet of whites.

Pierce sees the civil rights revolution of the 1950s and ‘60s as another important element in the development of the “whites-as-bad-guys” perception that has taken hold.  During those years, the media showed us images of inoffensive blacks marching and protesting amid what looked to be white hooligans who were screaming at them, assaulting them, and in some instances killing them.  After scores of television clips, news stories, and commentaries that painted this picture, resistance to what the civil rights activists wanted became equated in most people’s minds with KKK types and beefy Southern sheriffs and their German shepherds and water hoses.  It is understandable that most white people came to sympathize strongly with the dignified demonstrators and their cause and to be repulsed by their boorish and brutal white attackers and what we were told they represented.

Indeed, there were white working-class people who saw their way of life threatened and acted in an undignified and intemperate and violent way.  The media were quick to record it and place it in a context—within a story line—that appealed to what Pierce calls the innate white sense of propriety and fairness. The media transmitted these carefully selected scenes of white resistance to racial integration along with particular interpretations of what was happening over and over and over again. The white people who saw on their television screens and read about what their own people were doing were embarrassed by it and felt guilty over it. The media made the whole idea of resistance to racial integration shame- and guilt-inducing to most white people.

The media paired up names, labels, for what whites were seeing and hearing and reading and feeling during the civil rights revolution: racism, and racist. The media associated racism with white resistance to the civil rights organizations.  Again and again and again, they paired up white resistance to a single idea/explanation—racism.  Again and again and again, the media paired the image of the roughneck white opponent of civil rights being portrayed on the screen or in print with the label/identity of racist.  

After a time, the words themselves—“racism,” “racist”—came to evoke pangs of revulsion and guilt on their own, just as the sound of a dinner bell resulted in Pavlov’s dogs salivating.  The media had created a conditioned response to the word racism.  Now, all anybody has to do to get whites to turn pale, become apologetic, and give in is call them racist.  People don’t have to argue the facts with whites; all they have to do is push the right emotional button.  If they ring the “racist bell,” whites—even the most rugged and proudest of whites—will bow their heads and put their tails between their legs and let people have their way with them.

The media could have worked the conditioning the opposite way if they had wanted to by associating different things with white resistance to the civil rights movement.  They could have presented interviews with middle-class whites—professional people, academics, artists and writers, philosophers—who believed in racial and cultural integrity and pointed out the negative impact on countries like Puerto Rico, Brazil, and Portugal when the races were mixed together. The media could have shown what happened to white schools and neighborhoods after an infusion of blacks—the decay and disorder and crime. They could have interviewed white women raped by blacks. They could have presented case studies of white girls who mated with black boys they met in school and shown us their mixed-race children and let us see how we really felt about that. But they didn’t do that. That wasn’t consistent with the program.

During this time and since, Pierce points out, the schools joined the campaign of re-shaping white attitudes.  The curriculum kept students from understanding the rationale for segregation.   Segregation was linked to mindless hatred and oppression.  History was de-Europeanized and infused with the real and imaginary accomplishments of non-whites.  The churches also got into the act of decrying racism and promoting a multiracial society.  White politicians pandered to minority interests and lectured their own people about how they must share their lives with minorities and to give them anything they wanted. The schools, churches, and politicians promoted the idea that anyone opposed to an integrated society was evil and irrational, that is to say, a racist.  The only thing that operated against this wave of cultural re-shaping of whites, says Pierce, is the actual physical presence of blacks so that people could experience for themselves the glaring contradictions between the theory of racial equality and the reality of racial differences.

Pierce notes that race has become such a hot-button issue that it is very difficult to discuss it rationally at the present time. He says talking about race today must be how it was for Presbyterians to talk about sex a century ago.  He says he gets letters and messages from white people who say he ought to be killed for advocating separation of the races and opposing miscegenation.

As difficult as it is to do, however, whites must think and talk about race rationally and honestly.  They must not be embarrassed about it and feel guilty about it.  They must be willing to entertain the idea that wanting to live and work among their own people is a natural, healthy feeling they were born with.  Nature gave whites that impulse so that they could evolve as a race.  Living among their own allows them to develop special characteristics and abilities that set them apart from every other race. Living with their own is essential to their survival as a race. What is irrational and destructive is the very thing that is being pushed upon them—a multiracial, culturally conglomerate society and way of life.

It is going to take determination for whites to open up their eyes and their minds to reality, and more courage than they have shown in the past to begin to report to the world what they truly believe. But that is what whites must do.  Whites are being controlled by their fear of being smeared as racists if they disagree with the orthodoxy about race in this country.

In a Free Speech [a periodical Pierce published] article entitled “The Importance of Courage,” Pierce relates how he has dealt with his own fears around being called a racist.

I’m sorry to say that I’ve seen that same sort of timidity in myself.  When interviewers have asked me whether or not I am a racist, I have responded by asking, “Well, what do you mean by the word ‘racist’?” I’ve tried to wriggle out of giving a direct answer to the question.  I have resolved not to try to wriggle away from saying exactly what I believe when someone asks me whether or not I am a racist because it’s pretty clear what the interviewers have in mind when they ask me whether or not I am a racist.  These days anyone is a racist who refuses to deny the abundantly clear evidence that there are inherited differences in behavior, intelligence, and attitudes.  A racist is any white person who prefers to live among other whites instead of among non-whites and prefers to send his children to white schools.  A racist is any white person who feels a sense of identity with, a sense of belonging to, his own tribe, his own people, his own race, and who shows an interest in his race’s history, heroes, culture, and folkways.  A racist is a white person who finds the members of his own race more attractive physically than members of other races and who is instinctively repulsed by the idea of racial intermarriage or by the sight of a white person intimately involved with a non-white.  A racist is a white person who is disgusted with the multiracial cesspool that America is becoming. . . . Yes, I’m a racist.

*    *    *

William Pierce, 2001.  A brief footnote from me, 2021:

Individuals and groups use exaggerated, distorted, and false negative depictions and stories—White racism is a great example–to get attention, power, self-validation, and advantage, and hurt and destroy people.

My response these days to “You’re a racist” and “Are you a racist?” is “That’s your business, not mine.  But I’ll say this.   I’m not taking any more of your shit.”

38 replies
  1. Karlfried
    Karlfried says:

    William Luther Pierce has made a lot of speeches or radio monologues. — There is a book made of these speeches. It holds 1660 pages. — Edited by Shane Webster, Melbourne, Australia. —The name of the book ist “American Dissident Voices”. It is available as electronic book.—Those who want to look at the book can go to
    By the way, the name of the website translates to “for the good, against the bad”.
    Also I have arranged the names of famous thinkers und writers (and others) on a worldmap, which is clickable.There you can find more information about William Luther Pierce and about others. Please see at:
    This is a service from me to the readers of the Occidental Observer.
    Now I add some remarks about “racist”.
    Firstly, I avoid contact with “Gutmenschen” (do-gooders, liberals).
    A second approach: If a conversation goes in some direction, I make it clear that some amount of racism is a “must be” for everyone and every group. If a group does not have the will to live as a group that is destinctive to others, then that group will disappear.
    So if the other one tries to start a conversation with negative words about racism, I have been quicker and I have made clear that he is a killer of normal folks in case that he does not want racism and secure frontiers.
    In general: We fight for our lifes, for the life of our children, for truth and for the laws nature, but the other side fights for some crazy theoretical aimes.
    We must make this very clear, we must come to the point very quickly and very clearly.

    • James Clayton
      James Clayton says:

      … Wallace may have risen to power on the politics of racism, but some insist that he was not simply a racist. A black lawyer recalls, “Judge George Wallace was the most liberal judge that I had ever practiced law in front of. He was the first judge in Alabama to call me ‘Mister’ in a courtroom.” Later, when a supporter asked why he started using racist messages, Wallace replied, “You know, I tried to talk about good roads and good schools and all these things that have been part of my career, and nobody listened. And then I began talking about niggers, and they stomped the floor.” … https://www.bhamwiki.com/w/George_Wallace

  2. Karl Haemers
    Karl Haemers says:

    Conspicuously missing from this review of the book is any mention of the Jewish race. Pierce was an open racial opponent of Jews, and attributed much of the destruction and perversion of America and the West–including non-white immigration and miscegenation, even then– to Jews.

  3. Tim Folke
    Tim Folke says:

    Understandably many racially conscious Whites stay below the radar for fear of economic loss.

    For me, I stick to the old wisdom that sticks and stones will break my bones but names will never hurt me.

    So, when someone calls me a racist, I reply “Thanks for noticing! I appreciate the compliment”.

    If the name caller shows some signs of hope though, I will reply “Yes, I’m a racist because I believe in diversity”.

    • Old Enough
      Old Enough says:

      I just had to weigh in to say, that last line of yours is really, really good. I can just see the “huh?” expression that must evoke.

      To you I say, BRAVO!!

  4. Joe Webb
    Joe Webb says:

    To the standard query, Are you. a racist? Understand the social situation you are in. Don’t do anything foolish. If the situation is safe, then you could state that you are a humanitarian. Then common sense descriptions if how various races self-segregate, as in the schools, and that this self-segregation is natural and comforting to everybody
    If your contact is up to it, do the Socratic method of asking the kind of questions that are leading. let your interlocutor instruct himself.

    keep a pleasant demeanor, and excuse yourself if you detect hostility. Recall your own discomfort as you encountered Race. etc. Joe Webb.
    Given the present state of civil unrest…be careful.

  5. Penny Goldfarb Rothchild
    Penny Goldfarb Rothchild says:

    One of my favorite books. I’ve read it quite a few times.
    Pierce was right about everything.

  6. Joe Webb
    Joe Webb says:

    To the standard query, Are you. a racist? Understand the social situation you are in. Don’t do anything foolish. If the situation is safe, then you could state that you are a humanitarian. Then common sense descriptions of how various races self-segregate, as in the schools, and that this self-segregation is natural and comforting to everybody
    If your contact is up to it, do the Socratic method of asking the kind of questions that are leading. let your interlocutor instruct himself.

    keep a pleasant demeanor, and excuse yourself if you detect hostility. Recall your own discomfort as you encountered Race. etc. Joe Webb.
    Given the present state of civil unrest…be careful.

  7. Joe Webb
    Joe Webb says:

    To the standard query, Are you. a racist? Understand the social situation you are in. Don’t do anything foolish. If the situation is safe, then you could state that you are a humanitarian. Then common sense descriptions of how various races self-segregate, as in the schools, and that this self-segregation is natural and comforting to everybody is useful.
    If your contact is up to it, do the Socratic method of asking the kind of questions that are leading. let your interlocutor instruct himself.

    keep a pleasant demeanor, and excuse yourself if you detect hostility. Recall your own discomfort as you encountered Race. etc. Joe Webb.
    Given the present state of civil unrest…be careful.

    ANANDA says:

    This is very interesting timing for me particularly. I live in what is about the second most diverse zip code in the US, and it’s gotten rather irritating to live here. I can’t say that I’ve been afflicted with violence, and only minor harassment on two occasion over 13 years. So where we live, people were living peacefully among each other, and it was possible. I was not and am increasingly uncomfortable with the number of berkas I see, the gender segregation and misogyny in the lived lives of Jews and Muslims, the oppression of their girl children, the loud uncivil irritating behavior of black people — but not everyday and not all the time, and usually 90% of the time, MEN, and the endless breeding and loud incivility of the Latin hordes. I can’t go to the park on the weekend now. And beyond this the most infuriating thing is it is NOT these everyday people who really bother me or who are activists. Everyday people bother me for being stupid sheeple, across the board, but this is not race-based. And I give everyone a fair shot. The only awake person in my building I know of is a black female home health aide, with likely little education. So things are not always as stats predict.

    Rather, it is the other whites who are most dangerous and the most activist, almost across the board female. Stupid white liberal women are spearheading this thing. It is they who are the group to deal with. They are the ones carrying around the End White Supremacy signs with BLM signs on their windows.

    But all the same I have been jonesing to get the hell out of here and into a nice white place. But honestly white food lacks, it’s not very vegetarian, and the international cuisine is what keeps a lot of whites in the city. Internationals have amazing cuisines, especially the Indians, and we could learn a lot from this. Also remember blacks and whites have been getting together musically at this time period as well. Black musicians created blues, which created rock and roll and I don’t think this is a bad thing but a great thing that has made life worth living. Rock n roll.

    I am not for separatism but I am for keeping a white majority at at least 80-85%. If we establish a solid majority, return our immigration policy to 1965 (basically no Muslims, no Africans, no Latins), this could work. But we would still have the Black-Jew menace to deal with and the Jewish origin of the race war is really the problem whites need to focus on. Talking black-white is going to keep whites in the closet and weak on race. Talking Jew-goyim will be better, even though that sounds worse. But once the Jewish supremacy and Jewish tribalism and Jewish money crime is exposed, whites will have a better understanding of what they are up against. And we white women hope that white men stand with us is asserting our natural rights and freedoms, because this is the main area where third world and first world differs. Is it not better for women to be happier and more fulfilled? We need to remain flexible for women to have both career and family if they choose.

    For me third world — and first world — misogyny is a deal breaker. IF whites consider only men representative of their race, as does this article, even though women do the LABOR of CREATING humanity, then they will fail. You need to win the women and stand with the women and women will stand up as defenders of the West. Many do and want to even more.

    Sorry this is long, but I am getting very upset about all the anti-white policy. We need to organize in a peaceful and not explicitly racial way, at first, to coalesce consciousness of the war on whites. Any white organizing in the US right now will be called domestic terrorism, I surmise. Use Orwellian names, by all means. You have to.

  9. Blankaerd
    Blankaerd says:

    I discovered Pierce in the early 2000’s, unfortunately some years after he died. During my years at school it was Pierce who awakened me to the JQ. I really felt that the man helped me make sense of the world through his American Dissident Voices broadcast. I found the broadcasts so helpful that I decided to re-listen all of them two years ago. Many broadcasts are ‘dated’ or at least far less relevant than they were back when I listened to them the first time, but I have made a list of ones still relevant or timeless to share online or with people that I know.

    It was this renewed interest for Pierce that prompted me to purchase your biography about him. It had a bit of a sobering effect as I did not take Pierce for the loner that you portrayed him to be, but like you wrote he played a character for the purpose of the broadcast. I also felt a bit of sympathy for his latest wife, who seemed quite unhappy and lonely herself. I did not get the impression that she was made for the rural life far away from civilization.

    In my view Pierce remains a highly significant figure within the pro-white movement, though it seems like many of the younger generations have forgotten about him completely. With the advent of internet many skillful people have created excellent clips to go along with his broadcasts, some I still use for propaganda purposes today. But outside of that there is still wisdom to be gained from him, indeed like you wrote we are either racists or we die out. Thank you for these words, Pierce will not be forgotten.

    • Luke
      Luke says:

      I discovered American Dissident Voices and Dr. Pierce sometime around 1996 or 1997, and this was before he was making his Saturday ADV broadcasts available for free download on the website. I can’t recall exactly how or who might have lead me to discovering Dr. Pierce, but I do know this – I was immediately hooked on his weekly radio shows. In those days, I would pay $300 per year in order to receive 4 cassette tapes of his shows each month – and it was worth every penny.

      In the beginning, when listening to Dr. Pierce’s broadcasts – he would tackle a topic and mention details that, at that stage of my education on the JQ – I would say to myself, that can’t possibly be accurate – and I’d make a note to myself to do research later to see if what he said was the truth or just exaggeration. And, every time I did that – I would discover facts and substantiating evidence the proved Pierce was 100 percent correct.

      Thus, as time passed – my respect and admiration and, might I also say, my deep affection for Dr. Pierce (who I had never met) continued to grow . I can still remember the Saturday in 2002 when I logged onto the ADV website to download that week’s broadcast – and there was a repeat broadcast in place of a new show. I soon found the report that Dr. Pierce had passed way, and while this might sound odd to some – I felt waves of grief flood over me just as powerful as if a member of my own family had died.

      Next to my own Father, I would say that Dr. Pierce was the greatest and most positive – racially and otherwise – influence that I have had in my entire life. I hope to live long enough to see the day when there are monuments erected to honor this great White man and archives of his fantastic lectures become an essential part of every White school children’s education.

  10. moneytalks
    moneytalks says:

    Brilliantly concise analysis of how the chosenhite jewmasterss seized control of USA “schools, churches, and politicians” and used them to psychologicly manipulate Christian Whites into hating themselves .

  11. bruno
    bruno says:

    Dr. Pierce was a sharp cookie. He was also a versatile individual. He had a good pen and was decent when speaking. Most important he was an interesting fellow. He certainly believed in open communiqué and there can be no question primitivism bothered him when debate was canceled out. It’s too bad that people like him can’t live for a few hundred years. Our lives are so shot. Perhaps if we lived longer more problems could be solved.

    No doubt he would be somewhat of a broken man if he could see today’s forces that are aligned against free speech. In his day he could recall a different era. It would be interesting to see how he would’ve reacted in our world that is dominated by billionaires who run the show; by people who are able to buy just about everybody.

    Dr. Griffin has lived a productive life and was very lucky to have resided in VT, a place that’s like Byelorussia, Latvia or Poland. I wish to thank Dr. Griffin for spending the time to share. I’ve read much of his prior labour on Dr. Pierce. I wish Griffin was 40 years old. How time flies. I hope he lives a hundred years and retains much of his cognitive ability.

  12. George Kocan
    George Kocan says:

    Race is a hot-button issue because race is important. Black Live Matter because race matters. This contradicts the premise of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which claims race does matter, along with sex, national origin. religion and sex not matter. They all matter–greatly. I am amazed that such an obvious thing could be denied as public policy and law. I want to see the Cryptocracy, which promotes all this racial strife, make it all official: repeal the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

    • moneytalks
      moneytalks says:

      ” I am amazed that such an obvious thing
      [ as the significance of race / gender / (national origin) / religion ]
      could be denied as public policy and law.”

      The USA population was about 70% rural , and about 95% White , and predominantly Christian prior to ww2 . The Great Worldwide Depression of 1929 initiated a mass migration of mostly rural Whites to urban areas so that now only about 30% or less of the USA population is rural . Race / gender / (national origin) / religion are predominantly intellectual concerns which rural cultures traditionally have an aversion to since they normally have very little necessity to engage with those issues . The strong rural cultural tradition of aversion to intellectualism ( not mostly an IQ issue ) is still prevalent among Whites whom are now mostly urbanized . Consequently , most Whites continue to have underdeveloped critical thinking skills and underdeveloped or nonexistent social organs to protect them from the political manipulations and other exploitations of their chosenhite jewmasterss whom are the primary covert advocates of those pernicious race / gender / (national origin) / religion laws .

  13. Swan
    Swan says:

    My response to “Are you a racist or you’re a racist”: That’s a weaponized word designed to brow beat me into submission.

    • James Clayton
      James Clayton says:

      Nice page and essay: I especially enjoyed the 56-slide show of breathtakingly-beautiful women of European descent from Norwegian to Circassian. Thank you.

  14. James Clayton
    James Clayton says:

    Thank you, Robert. But I still think you need to get out here and press the flesh with your admirers. My wife especially wants to meet you.

  15. Jennifer Goldfarb Greenblatt
    Jennifer Goldfarb Greenblatt says:

    Just a reminder….the term “racist” was coined by Trotsky to demonize the innocent Russian
    people so that the Bolsheviks felt justified in the mass murder of 60 MILLION Orthodox Christians.
    The Jewish definition of racist says that ONLY whites can be racist…..so the term racist
    simply means white person. In Jew thought, all white people are evil racists and they deserve to die.

  16. guest
    guest says:

    My response to “Are you a racist?” is “By your standards I probably am but who cares about your standards?”

  17. Cthulhu
    Cthulhu says:

    The great majority of the time, when someome calls you a racist in this day and age, they may as well be shooting at you, because somewhere down the line, that is what they intend to do.

    Others who express concern about what you think will not call you racist, they will express concern about whatever about you they believe is racist, allowing you to explain.

    Pierce spent his life doing a great many services to our people, but he did so in another time. Then it was possible to get an audience as a racist on television, it was even possible for David Cole and Mark Weber to at least attempt to explain the inconsistencies of the holocaust to a late night audience.

    We don’t live in that world. If they aren’t white,do not talk to them unless necessary. If they are white, only talk to them if they carry themselves with honor. If they do not, and you must talk to them, decieve them into the clutches of their precious brown horde, as they are most useful as examples of what awaits the rest of us if we do nothing.

    Hail Doctor Piece, Hero of the White Race!

  18. James Clayton
    James Clayton says:

    For those unfamiliar with the late, great Professor Emeritus Garrett Hardin, Ph.D., this would be a good place to start:


    “… “Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.” ,,, Evolution through natural selection so all-encompassing a process that biologists should not, merely for the sake of momentary peace, draw back from defending… The principal opponents to evolution have been members of certain religions. The objectors have been
    only a small fraction of the total religious population, but they have been very vocal. Their indignant outcries
    have now dropped to a low level of decibels. Still, in many communities [such as third-world immigration-pushing Seventh-day Adventist communities and their schools and healthcare systems], it takes considerable courage to be
    a good biology teacher [not to mention a medical professional].
    Now on the horizon is another conflict that is also, in a deep sense, [another] religious one. This is the conflict over
    growth. The idea of perpetual growth is embraced with religious fervor by [increasingly-desperate-for tax revenue and left-liberal voters– ] mainstream economists and other worshipers of “Progress” …

  19. James Clayton
    James Clayton says:

    The late Edgar J. Steele, a trial lawyer, “defensive racist”, proved that one can overcome childhood programming from Seventh-day Adventism to living in the there & then (“… There’s a place that I heard-of, once in a lullaby…”) rather than the here & now of our personal experience. This is a free download of a hardback that is getting hard to find and is well worth your time both reading and sharing. The last page is the back page of the dust jacket that includes an endorsement from Ernst Zundel. Archive it.


  20. Roberrt Keith
    Roberrt Keith says:

    Wonderful, satisfying news explaining the false angst that white people have been made to feel. It should be widely propagated, There is one reservation: when asked whether he was a racist, he should have ignored such an insulting question. By not doing so, he acknowledged his own “guilt”. Are you a wife-beater?There is some nobility in not answering a question you are asked.

    • Carolyn Yeager
      Carolyn Yeager says:

      You are equating being a ‘racist’ to being a wife-beater.

      Being called a ‘racist’ should not be taken as an insult. This is hiding from the problem. Racism and the reality of race needs to be explained and openly discussed.

  21. Armoric
    Armoric says:

    Unlike Pierce, I would say I’m not a racist. I’m in favor of racial separation, nothing more. Our enemies have a more sinister objective: they want to destroy us or use us as a disposable commodity. We want to live, they want us dead. Who are the real racists?
    Of course, the word racist is deliberately ambiguous. Our defensive racism is something very different from the genocidal racism of our Jewish rulers. Unfortunately, they have been able to criminalize both our soft defensive racism and any criticism of their harsh genocidal racism.

  22. TJ
    TJ says:

    Am I a racist? No, I am a racialist. Clear understanding of facts cry out for racialism. . .

    Evolution vs. creation? What if evolution is a creative process?
    Randomness brings things down, not up. A smooth beach is an example of randomness. A sand castle is when the sand has been de-randomized- not by randomness, but by consciousness.

    A classic read- Human Destiny by Lecomte duNouy [1947]. Used, available from $8 w/shipping.


    The author seems to think that disproving randomness is same a proving a certain religion. Like he wanted to avoid offending Christians-

  23. Truth as Hammer
    Truth as Hammer says:

    Q: How to respond to: Are you a racist? or You are a racist!
    A: Anyone who intends harm to my White brothers and sisters because they are white, is my enemy, and will be treated so.

  24. Kevin MacDonald
    Kevin MacDonald says:

    This comment was submitted by Will Williams, President of the National Alliance, but for some reason it was regarded as spam by the program. Here it is:
    I was just alerted to this piece about William Luther Pierce today. I’d unsubscribed to TOO last month after the organization founded by Pierce, the National Alliance (NA), was smeared by a hostile commentator as a “demented cult,” while he also quoted SPLC garbage about us, as comments were closed. The unfair smears remained, unrefuted, after I had protested.

    One commentator under this current article notes that Jews are not mentioned. Jews are not in the scope of this article. They are covered in Chapter 22 of _The Fame of a Dead Man’s Deeds_ “Pierce and Jews,” available here: https://cosmotheistchurch.org/product/the-fame-of-a-dead-mans-deeds-an-up-close-portrait-of-white-nationalist-william-pierce-by-robert-s-griffin/

    Pierce’s Cosmotheist philosophy that is embraced by so many of us is not mentioned either, though it runs through everything he wrote and is the spiritual aspect that sets NA apart from the rest of the greater, loosely structured pro-White movement. Chapter 14 in _Fame_ covers some about WLP’s formulation of Cosmotheism in the 1970s beyond Pantheism, and his Cosmotheist Community Church’s troubles with the IRS over tax exemption in the 1980s. For a more thorough understanding of Pierce’s “Religion of the Future,” see: https://cosmotheistchurch.org/product/cosmotheism-religion-of-the-future-by-william-pierce/
    In Dr. Griffin’s own words, he writes;

    “Did whites feel their race was superior to other races? In general, yes, they did, says Pierce… Basically, they believed they had a superior culture and superior race. In that sense, they were what today would be called *white supremacists*. Pierce argues that an outgrowth of people’s natural feelings of racial identification and favoritism is to *segregate* themselves from other people, to live among their own in the ways they prefer…”

    That word “segregate” is misleading when attributed to WLP, as is the word “supremacist.” He was a strict geographical racial separatist. Racial segregation, like Apartheid, was a failed half-measure. No supremacy over other races; no mere segregation from them in the same living space; no exploitation of them, but total separation as he clearly describes here: https://natall.com/about/what-is-the-national-alliance/

    Dr. Pierce always capitalized the word White when writing about our people. The first thing that struck me when reading this article is that Griffin uses the lower case white, which is all right since that is the way he writes. He is Pierce’s biographer, not a follower; not a Cosmotheist, certainly, but a Christian. Regardless, it is not right when he is quoting Pierce directly, like here, when he has him using lower case white also:

    “A racist is any white person who prefers to live among other whites instead of among non-whites and prefers to send his children to white schools…”

    Some will say that is nitpicking, but I don’t think it is. At least in _Fame”_ where Pierce is quoted directly, using the word White four times in that one sentence (on page 330), the word is accurately capitalized each time.

    Thank you for _Fame_, Dr. Griffin. It has awakened (not “woke”) thousands of our people to Dr. Pierce’s teachings in the past 20 years — many which can be heard here: Natall.com/Bitchute.


    • Armoric
      Armoric says:

      By using another search engine than Google, I can find a collection of William Pierce’s speeches in mp3 format on the archive.org site. There’s also a written version of those speeches (see the first comment).
      But the NatAll channel on BitChute is not available in some countries. This is what I get in France:
      This channel is unavailable at your location due to the following restrictions:
      Contains National Socialist Symbology
      Contains Incitement to Hatred

Comments are closed.