Sunday, June 26, 2011

Making The Responsible Choice

Making The Responsible Choice

ADV Broadcast Of June 25, 2011

Hello, and welcome to another broadcast of American Dissident Voices, the Internet radio program of the National Alliance. I’m your host and Chairman of the Alliance, Erich Gliebe.

I have spoken in the past about the necessity of building an infrastructure of White racialists and having them placed in key positions throughout the System. That is, we need Whites who share our worldview in positions of influence in areas such as education, law enforcement, the military, business and finance, the judicial system, the FBI, etc. And while currently there are White racial activists in certain positions of influence – most of them clandestinely – there are nearly not enough of our people entrenched in the System to counter the destructive behavior of Jews who are in positions of power.

With that said, I’d like to mention one White racial activist who did hold a key position, that being in the judicial system. And that individual would be former Muscogee, Georgia Municipal Court Judge Haywood Turner, who recently passed away after a brief illness in his hometown of Columbus, Georgia. Turner remained active till the end, and had even attended the October 2010 National Alliance Leadership Conference at our National Office in Mill Point, West Virginia. He was 67.

Haywood Turner was defeated in 2008 by Stephen Hyles, a Columbus attorney. Until then, his judgeship remained undefeated for nearly two decades. Asked his philosophy when first elected Municipal Court judge in 1988, Haywood told a reporter: “It should be one of our greatest duties to live in such a way that vulnerability is never exploited.”

Haywood Turner proved that as White racialists we can make inroads into the System. He set a perfect example for other White activists to follow. Haywood Turner will be greatly missed by all those fortunate to have known him.

We live in a very uncertain world. Despite all of the advances in communication -- Internet and cell phones, for instance -- there is still a lot that we don't know. The technological gizmos allow what we DO know or think we know to be communicated more rapidly and more easily, but they can't solve the problems related to our inability to REALLY know some definite answers.

For example, when meteorologists analyze data about weather patterns in a given region of the country, they make predictions about the future weather. As we all know, those predictions are only about the weather in the immediate future. Predictions about weather that is more than a week or so down the road is essentially meaningless. Watch the 10-day forecast for a week and keep track of how the projected weather for a particular date changes as that date draws nearer and nearer. It changes.

That isn't to say that meteorologists are deliberately trying to deceive the rest of us. It simply means that there are lots of variables to account for when dealing with the weather, and not all of them are known with a high degree of certainty. And if you guess wrong about one variable, then it could throw off what you thought would happen later. Consider a basketball player shooting from the three-point line; on consecutive shots, a small difference in how a shot approaches the basket determines if the ball goes in the hoop or whether it misses. And if it misses, here again small differences will determine HOW it misses: whether it bounces high off the rim or directly down toward the floor, whether there will be a weak- or strong-side rebound, and so on.

The same sort of uncertainty and variability occurs when predicting the weather, and in fact occurs with just about everything in life. Life is inherently uncertain, and just when you think you know what will happen, something changes and the whole scenario has to be re-worked. It's like trying to predict which team will win the World Series in a given year; it can't be done. All you can do is look at the available data and try to come up with the odds of something happening.

As many of you know, the founder of the National Alliance and its leader for about three decades until his death in 2002 was Dr. William L. Pierce. Dr. Pierce earned a Ph.D. in physics and was therefore a scientist by training who eventually left academia in order to dedicate his life to the salvation of his people. The sort of thinking that I've been talking about -- dealing with uncertainty and weighing the odds -- is something like how a true scientist, like Dr. Pierce, is forced to think when dealing with scientific problems.

So Dr. Pierce would be much more qualified to talk to you about uncertainty than I am, but he's no longer with us. I know a little about such matters, and I think that there are a few good points of thought that we can go through together, even though I don't have a Ph.D. in physics. I'm not so much interested in scientific uncertainty, though, as I am with uncertainty dealing with our position as a race in the world today.

Even the White American mainstreamer is aware of uncertainty in his life that is related to the political, social, and philosophical issues that we White racialists are trying to address. Many of our blue collar workers, having seen so many of our industrial and manufacturing jobs head to the Orient, live every day with the uncertainty of whether or not they'll be back at work tomorrow. The fear and uncertainty involved in the possibility of getting pink-slipped takes its toll on the White American worker and his family.

Similarly, especially as the non-White population in the United States has continued to grow, there is the constant uncertainty of whether or not one is going to be robbed or raped or killed on any given night. Many non-White gangs are known to require that new gang members successfully pass initiation rites, which might include any of a number of crimes that must be committed against a White victim.

How about the uncertainty felt by the thousands and thousands of relatives of members of the U.S. armed forces? These people are in a constant state of tension as their sons and husbands -- and even, in some cases, their daughters and wives -- are scuffling through the boiling sands of Iraq and Afghanistan on a purposeless mission pushed through and maintained by a corrupt government. Unfortunately, the relatives of about 6,000 of those soldiers have had some of the uncertainty removed from their lives, having been made aware by representatives of the U.S. Government that their loved one has given his or her life in the line of duty.

Sadly, in those cases, the uncertainty of a loved one being alive or dead has been replaced by the uncertainty of why exactly the U.S. is in Iraq in the first place. President Obama, of course, has offered no plausible explanation to clear up this uncertainty.

All of these uncertainties are short-term ones -- one might even say immediate ones. But White American mainstreamers are dealing with longer-range uncertainty as well. Some American Whites are asking longer-range questions like...

"If things keep going like they have been, what is the place that used to be my quiet -- almost boring -- hometown going to look like ten years from now?"

"When I graduated from high school, my class was all White. When I went to the Homecoming football game last fall, it looked like three-fourths of the team and half the cheerleaders were non-Whites. What will it be like in five years?"

"It seems like every restaurant in town is almost fully staffed with Mexicans. How many will be around here in ten years, and what will they be doing?"

Questions like those I just listed are the ones that fester in the backs of the minds of perceptive mainstream Whites, but to some degree, all Whites are asking questions of this nature. In fact, it has been my experience that usually whenever people talk about crime or the high rate of teen pregnancy or drug use among young people, there is an implicit connection in the mind of the questioner between these issues and race. In my dealings with others, I have often succeeded in getting the White askers of such questions to admit that race plays a role in all of these issues, although most people won't say so at first.

And the reason White mainstreamers think that race plays a part in these issues is because it does. Or, in light of what I stated earlier about Dr. Pierce and his scientific frame of mind, perhaps I should say, "To a high degree of certainty, race plays a part in such issues." As the race problem has grown and the degree of diversity has increased, these problems have grown as well. Obviously, the amount of Muslim terrorism in Britain has definitely increased as the Muslim population of the British Isles has grown in recent years.

Now, the scientific purists out there will tell you that nothing can be known with absolute certainty. They'll tell you that the best we can do is to look at the available evidence and make our best judgment call based on that. Later, if and when new evidence becomes available, we might have to modify our conclusion, either a lot or a little. But to NOT draw a conclusion is not possible, so we might as well draw a conclusion that is logically consistent with the facts as we know them at the present time.

Those ideas -- that we can't get away from making decisions and taking action AND so we should therefore make decisions that are well-informed -- were a common theme that ran through the writings and speeches of the late American philologist, scholar, and patriot Dr. Revilo P. Oliver. Dr. Oliver believed that Western science, which is based on the idea that we must be as objective as possible about the world around us, was one of the crowning achievements of Western man. Whatever information we have available, that information must be considered in making a decision. We know in advance that we cannot obtain all the information before deciding; in other words, there will always be uncertainty. Nonetheless, our lack of information and our uncertainty don't excuse us from doing our best to make the best judgment possible, based on what we DO know.

And in the case of most interest to me and to the audience of these broadcasts -- which is the case of the present and future situation of the White race -- what we DO know are two things. One, we have a lot of information at our beck and call that tells us about the races in the world today: their relative populations, their rates of growth and decline, and their average physical and psychological differences. I'm not a geneticist, but if the Human Genome Project can identify every gene in the human genome, then I don't see why we shouldn't be able to identify the essential average differences in the genes between the various races of man. Perhaps this has already been done, and I encourage an experienced geneticist to contact me and point me in the right direction here. But my point is that we have an avalanche of evidence on the racial situation today, not only in individual countries but also worldwide. Granted, not all of this information is easy to find, but the growth of the Internet over the last decade has made more of this sort of information available to an ever-wider audience.

And secondly, there is plenty of information out there about the racial situation in the past: how the individual races came into being, which races have created which civilizations, the guiding principles of some of those civilizations, and what has happened when different races have tried to occupy the same living space. There are many questions that yet remain to be answered -- that is, there is still a good deal of uncertainty -- but, as living beings, we are required to make the best decisions we can, based on all the information we can lay our hands on.

It is my contention that the men who are making the decisions that are affecting our people today are not making decisions that are in the best interests of our people. Now, when someone makes a decision that has a negative effect on another, it is usually because they either didn't have enough information available to them OR because they don't share the same values. In other words -- and this is key -- if I make a decision that hurts you, it is usually because I didn't gather the necessary information to make a better decision OR... I don't like you.

Now, in the case of White people as a worldwide group, the essential information is known to everyone in any position to influence the decisions that affect that population group. The essential information is the following:

The percentage of Whites in the world is decreasing, while the percentage of non-Whites is increasing. Furthermore, the RATE at which the White population is falling is not a steady rate; that rate of decline is increasing. In addition, the areas that have traditionally been populated only by Whites are now being increasingly invaded by non-Whites, with miscegenation becoming more and more prevalent. All of these facts amount to the fact that the White race is being snuffed out.

About those facts, the only uncertainty is in the nit-picky details. The essentials of those facts are undeniable, which rules out the first part of the problem -- which is a lack of information -- when someone makes a decision that hurts another.

And this brings us to the second part of the problem: different values. In my value system and in the value system of all National Alliance members and even in most White mainstreamers, the White race is an entity worth saving. The reasons as to WHY it's worth saving will vary between individuals. Some will say that the White race has contributed much that is worthwhile to humanity, including not only Western literature and the marvel of Western science, but also the highest art -- such as music, architecture, painting, and sculpture. Some will talk in vague terms about beauty, or about the White man's love of freedom and his concern for the rights of the individual, and so on. But MOST Whites believe that our race should continue to exist.

Well, given that we are being snuffed out, it would seem reasonable to assume that our leaders would take such action as to halt and even reverse the decline in the White population... IF they (or those who influence them) share our belief that the White race should survive.

It's obvious, isn't it? Neither our leaders NOR those who control them share with the White population even the most primitive value of desiring that a race that has given so much to humankind should survive. And I'm not talking about the many explicit racialist values that form the worldview of the National Alliance. I'm talking about the simple desire that the White race survive. Our leaders don't have it. Neither do the strongest powers in the land, which are the men who manage our media of news and entertainment.

Our leaders don't care that the White race survives because all they care about is themselves. A good income, lots of material possessions, phony popularity, and the ability to strut around in the marble halls of government... these are the things that drive them to prostitute themselves to those whose blessing or curse has the power to give or take away these superficial materialisms.

The media masters don't share the value of White racial survival because they aren't White. They are Jews -- the vast majority of them -- as has been shown elsewhere. Yes, there's a lot of uncertainty about the Jews, but based on the available evidence -- their ancient historical writings, their modern commentaries, and their activities in the West since the beginning -- the only rational conclusion is that they seek to destroy us and, while in the process of destroying us, they seek to exploit us. Even leaving room for uncertainty, the available evidence -- taken as a whole -- leads to that conclusion.

And for that reason we must distance ourselves from the Jews and from all other races as well. If we want our highest value to prevail, and that value is that our race survive and make progress, then we have to have the courage to take measured action based on the evidence available and the most probable conclusions that can be drawn from it.

If you're going to be outside today and the weatherman says that it's probably going to be hot and sunny, you'd better bring along your sunscreen. There's some uncertainty, and it's all based on probabilities, but it's better to be safe than sorry.

If you're going to be out of town all day and the weatherman says that it's probably going to rain, you'd better make sure all the windows are closed. There's some uncertainty, and it's all based on probabilities, but it's better to be safe than sorry.

If, based on the available evidence, your people are in danger of disappearing off the face of the planet within the space of a few hundred years, you'd better seriously consider becoming an activist in Our Cause. There's some uncertainty, and it's all based on probabilities, but it's better to be safe than sorry.

Remember, to NOT act just because we don't have every last detail of information is to voluntarily refuse to help. Yes, it's an uncertain world with an uncertain future, but you can increase the probability that your race survives and has a viable future by making the responsible choice.

I’m Erich Gliebe, and thanks for being with me again today.

No comments:

Post a Comment