Survival of the Species
Chapter Four
The executions heralded the beginning of the White Revolution in Australia. Of course, this did not spark a popular uprising by the Australian People against the Traitor Occupied Government, nor was such an uprising expected.
The Australian People, just like all other White peoples around the world, had become - for the most part - fearful, apathetic, useless, and liberalistic to the point of self-destruction. While a large part of that was due to brainwashing (via the cosmopolitans who had insidiously taken over education, politics, and the media), much of it was due to the high standard of living that had made Whites in general too soft. Overall, the average person was quite adept at expressing their individual personalities regarding the regular things in life - whether it be based around family, children, cars, football, social clubs, fashion, music, clothing, etc; but when it came to their outlook on the bigger picture of life, they were so easily lead that it just wasn't funny. The Establishment had so easily switched society from racial pride in the 1940s-1950s to multiracialism in the 1960s-1970s, and most people had just taken it in their stride. The mass shaping of their attitudes (brainwashing is brainwashing, no matter how you package it) was carried out by the ascending Traitor Class, via the media, education system, and major political parties (in that order of importance), and all of this was done with hardly a whimper. No wonder some politicians referred to the masses as "cattle".
One of the most important social bases of the Traitor Class were the universities, where the liberal-internationalists manufactured their lies and - in effect - trained their new recruits. Before these institutions were swamped, and eventually taken over, by those adhering to the liberal-internationalist ideology, they served more or less successfully as forums where all ideas could be discussed in an atmosphere of universal tolerance. But this was no more; many universities put into place rigid rules against free speech (under the Orwellian guise of banning what they called "hate speech"); political and social ideas, and even plain factual evidence, that contradicted or opposed the preferred world-view of the globalists were simply not allowed. Unfortunately, the bulk of the nation's elite was trained in the universities, and this helped to perpetuate the rule of the Traitor Class.
The other important social base of the Traitor Class was the media, which had become dominated by liberal-internationalists (and also contained a large proportion of homosexuals and other perverts), and it was in the power of these people to shape the attitudes of the general population. Via the media, the Australian people were undergoing a constant process of indoctrination; television programmes, movies, newspapers, and radio - all reflected or pushed an ideological "line" of liberal-internationalism. It was not a conspiracy or concerted effort as such, but the media had become dominated by hordes of globalists, who either subconsciously integrated their internationalist beliefs into their media work, or who deliberately did so - many of them believed that their mission in life was "to change the world... to be a better place"; but, unfortunately, their concept of a "better place" was that of a raceless, rootless, one-world state. The media acted in the same way as so many other liberal-internationalists; in that the free flow of thoughts, ideas, and opinions was completely intolerable if such views didn't agree with their own general world-view. It was sometimes said that the motto of all the major media outlets should be: "All The News That Fits Our Views".
It was the System itself that was the enemy. The "System" being the government, media, educational system, law courts, political parties, and all the other branches of the Establishment. The New Class (the Traitor Class), consisting mostly of the university-educated, from whom spring the up-and-coming socio-political elite, began to overrun the System in the 1960s and 1970s (later consolidating their power in the 1980s). The cohorts of the Traitor Class, who are inherently liberal-internationalist, obtained positions of power in the System's institutions, whereupon - being people of somewhat like minds - they sought to impress their world-view upon the rest of society. The ideological minions of the System are always pushing their ideology as part of their general work – and the situation is mirrored in most, if not all, Western countries; which is why so much of the trash that comes out of Hollywood is so full of insidious messages favourable to multiculturalism and multiracialism.
One Racial Nationalist once said that "The problem is that we are operating from a position of extreme weakness. Only a tiny few of us even recognize that there is a problem, while most other Whites simply accept all that is happening and even very often with enthusiasm. To compound this, the broad masses are feminine in nature; they respect and follow power, in this case the overwhelming power of the liberal forces. The herd is shuffling along in the politically correct and media-approved direction. It is heading straight for the cliff, the abyss, but that's not important to it. The main thing is that it does the approved thing."
It is necessary for all Whites to realize that the crisis of Western Civilisation isn't in the future - it's occurring right now. Sometimes it's really obvious, but usually it's so subtle as to be imperceptible to most people; and it is in progress in every White country across the globe. And yet, the White masses can't see the danger to their own race and civilisation. Or if they can, they are too scared, lazy, or apathetic (or brainwashed) to do anything about it. The horrifying fact was that when Karl sought to discover who was behind the decline of the White Race, he found that it was the White Race itself that was at fault. White people in general, and - prior to the advent of the Silent Brotherhood - the existing Racial Nationalists in particular, were the problem!
As one White activist put it, in an open letter to Nationalists: "We have allowed ourselves to become weak, cowardly, corrupt, greedy, perverted, sluggish and bone-idle lazy in body and mind, poisoned in our blood and in our thoughts. We have the spines of jellyfish, the attention span of a house fly, and the courage of rabbits. We are held in utter contempt by every serious radical movement in the world today from Hamas to the IRA to the Lower Bungi-Bungi Liberation Front, and rightly so. Sorry, folks. YOU are the problem, and I'm not letting you off the hook".
Up until the Revolution, this was largely true; there were so many patriots that were too scared to stand up for their own People, too many Nationalist hobbyists (who thought that "joining" a group was enough, that it was a substitute for actually doing something), and too many who were quite happy being inactive - all of them were waiting for "someone else" to do the work.
As far as Karl was concerned, most of the current White population didn't deserve to live - if those useless idiots couldn't, or wouldn't, stand up for themselves, then why should he care? But the relevant point was not these current fools of the White Race, but the Race itself, the ideal embodied in the White Race - its past achievements and future potential. And this race, no matter what, was HIS RACE - and had to be preserved at all costs.
Karl knew that just as his family was an extension of himself, his Nation and Race were further extensions; that he owed his loyalty to his Race, Nation, and family (ultimately, in that order).
As an avid reader of history, Karl had "seen" the rise and fall of White civilisations throughout the ages; each going through the six stages of the organic life cycle of civilisations: outburst, conquest, commerce, affluence, intellect, and decadence (intrinsic with the last stage of civilisation was the massive influx of foreign peoples). It seemed that there was some sort of inevitable cycle of history; after economic success came decadence - moral and character weakness, leading to lethargy and loss of race-consciousness. But, in the past, whenever one White civilisation fell, the White Race still survived elsewhere, and thus was able to provide the foundation stone for a new civilisation. The difference this time, with the ultimate fall of Western Civilisation, was that the White Race was letting itself be destroyed worldwide. If this happened, the White Race would never return to grace the face of the earth - and the future potential of humanity would be forever diminished by this event of racial genocide.
Karl had often said that if he had to choose between his nation being ruled as a White communist dictatorship or as a multiracial democracy, he would pick the Communist choice anytime - for although he by far preferred democracy to dictatorship, the fact was that communism could always be overthrown, even if it took one hundred years, but a mongrelised population could never be reversed.
On a practical note, it was obvious that the White Race had produced the best civilisations of all history. White technology, culture, and general advancement far surpassed those of the other races. Some cosmopolitans would say that cultures can't be compared to each other, but that was just a liberalistic wimpy cop-out. Which is better for long-distance communication, tom-toms or telephones? And if the Negroes had the choice, then they too would have chosen telephones; indeed, they did: African countries use telephones, not tom-toms, nowadays. And what about those cultures that included child marriages, female circumcision, being speared in the leg as a legal punishment, not to mention a whole host of other abhorrent cultural practices? Liberalistic types might argue that we can't criticise other cultures, but that was simply ridiculous - can't we have opinions on anything outside of our own culture? Indeed, it is part of our culture to be able to pass judgement on other cultures (especially on those cultural practices that we would view as downright barbaric or morally wrong); and so, to try to deny us that right of criticism, the liberalistic globalists were, in fact, trying to deny us one of our own cultural practices - but, to the cosmopolitan types, Western culture was never something to be defended - because of their White Guilt Complex, our culture was always to be treated as something of second importance, or as second rate, when compared to Third World cultures. The globalists' views notwithstanding, Western Culture - the culture of the White Race - was the best in the world.
Of course, it is quite natural and acceptable to criticise other cultures. In fact, the liberalistic cosmopolitans had, in the past, often criticised the "racist" cultures of South Africa and the southern states of the USA, as well as criticising some sexist aspects of some foreign cultures. This idiotic notion of non-judgemental cultural relativism was, in effect, just another ideological weapon used by liberals to stop ordinary people criticising non-White cultures; even though, hypocritically, at the same time, those same liberals were incessantly criticising White cultures.
The question of race was not just a matter of skin colour, although that was an outward indicator; race was not just skin deep. Racial genetics was far more complicated. External physical characteristics are the most obvious of racial differences; beyond skin colour, there are many other factors, such as hair, eyes, and bone structure (forensic scientists can determine the race of skeletons). Lesser known are the internal biological differences. These range from the minor to the major. Pregnancy gestation periods can differ slightly between races; dissimilarities in some internal organs can be such as to affect, or disallow, inter-racial organ transplants. The genetic differences even extend to the point where some diseases exist largely within one race, but not within others. Mental differences exist between the races; not only in overall intelligence, but also in different fields of mental capabilities (for instance, in intelligence testing, one race may typically achieve higher scores in verbal performance, whilst another may demonstrate prowess in visuospatial ability) - as has been overwhelmingly shown by large numbers of studies and publications (such as The Bell Curve by Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray, and Race, Evolution, and Behavior by J. Philippe Rushton - the latter book being a definitive work on racial differences). These mental differences between the races are usually studiously ignored or denied by many scientists - being either liberals or those who were well aware that their funding (and their social and physical welfare) would be threatened if they scientifically and neutrally examined racial differences, as such work would be a negation of the "we're all the same" ideology of the globalists.
Without a doubt, many internationalist scientists and sociologists deliberately deny or attack scientific findings that are not in accord with their globalist world-view. For instance; J. Philippe Rushton in Race, Evolution, and Behavior quotes one globalist, Charles Leslie - an advisory editor of Social Science and Medicine, as attacking Rushton's published research into race matters. Leslie proclaimed that "Most of the influential work in the social sciences is ideological... Our claim to being scientific is one of the main intellectual scandals of the academic world... By and large, we believe in, and our social science is meant to promote, pluralism and democracy."
Among those non-Establishment experts who are well-versed in racial differences, racial history, and anthropology, it is widely agreed that Culture derives from Race. To be more precise, Culture is a product of Race, tempered by environment. The wider Western Culture is a product of the White Race. Non-Whites may assimilate into Western Culture, but if they come to be demographically predominant in White countries, then Western Culture will irreversibly veer off its course, if not to be eventually destroyed forever. Karl recognised the fact that "Race is the basis of all civilisation".
To Karl, it was quite obvious that mongrelised countries would just not work (in terms of keeping civilisation alive, anyhow), and would eventually descend into chaos. This was an obvious fact, taught by history; and the USA was a prime example of a once-great nation going into a multiracial decline.
Karl had read much about the racial problems in America, and about that country's steady demise. However, one item in particular had caught his attention; he had been given a newspaper cutting from the 1990s ("The Race War of Black Against White", by Paul Sheehan, Sydney Morning Herald, 20 May 1995, section 5, page 1A), that exposed several revealing facts about race relations in the USA (facts that were all the more startling when you considered that Blacks constituted only 12% of the US population at the time): 90% of victims of inter-racial crimes were White; in 1992 almost 1,000,000 White Americans were murdered, robbed, assaulted, or raped by Blacks (compared with 132,000 Black Americans who were murdered, robbed, assaulted, or raped by Whites); Blacks murdered Whites eighteen times more than Whites murdered Blacks; FBI statistics indicated that between 1964 and 1994 that more than 25,000,000 violent inter-racial crimes had occurred (mostly Blacks attacking Whites) - and if non-violent crimes were to be included, such as burglary, larceny, car theft, and personal theft, there had been an estimated 170,000,000 crimes by Blacks against White Americans in that same time-frame; in fact, over that same period more than 45,000 people were killed in inter-racial murders - as a comparison, 58,000 Americans died in the Vietnam War, whilst 34,000 were killed in the Korean War. What all of the information in the article added up to was that the USA was involved in an undeclared Race War - an unavoidable consequence of a multiracial society. Other information that Karl received showed that the statistics themselves were understated: Hispanic criminals were often classified by the US police as "White"; and also, when the race of criminals was not recorded, such criminals would then be automatically be classified as "White". Of course, the size and proportion of the Black against White crime rate in America had increased drastically since 1995, but now, several decades later - with the Whites as a minority - the American government was no longer releasing race-based crime figures.
Of course, when faced with such statistics, liberal-internationalists would go onto the attack. They would either call you a racist for even discussing such a matter (this works almost every time, to silence people), would dispute the statistics (an easy fallback position, especially when they refuse to supply any opposing statistics), or would trot out the old liberal cliche that "poverty causes crime". The latter has always been a liberal excuse for those who commit crime; but, as one American "racist" once showed, there were several counter-arguments that demonstrated that "poverty" has little to do with crime:
1. The period of the least amount of crime in the USA was during the great Depression of 1929-1930s.
2. If crime causes poverty, why are there so many poor people who don't commit crime, while many rich people do.
3. In the 1990s, New York had double the nation's unemployment rate, yet the crime rate in that city dropped the most of any city in the country.
4. Of all those arrested in New York during the 1977 blackout, eighty-eight percent had jobs.
The apologists for the Blacks would say that the Black crime rate was so high because "the White man" wouldn't give jobs to Blacks. As usual, the liberals would blame the Whites for any failings in a multiracial society. Also, most liberals would refuse to recognise the existence of a virtual Race War, as to do so would upset their vision of the world; and they would especially refuse to consider that it was the different mentality of Blacks that could be in any way a contributing factor.
However, in Australia, it was the influx of massive numbers of Asians, and the huge - and increasing - numbers of Australian-born Asians that was the major racial problem; the "Yellow Peril" was swamping Australia. Not only were the Asians dispossessing the Whites, but they had brought with them their street gangs (as well as some more organised groups, such as the Triads), inter-ethnic rivalries, and alien cultures. Ghettoes had arisen in many places, like Springvale (which Aussies referred to as Chingvale) and Cabramatta (Vietnamatta), which had become virtual outposts of Asia; such places were not only to the racial detriment of the Australian People, but were also economically detrimental, as they were largely economically self-contained - the Asians generally did all their trading with other Asians, so that their money stayed within their community; and the Asian ghettoes acted as an economic whirlpool for outside money (as money spent by Aussies in Springvale would disappear into the inter-Asian trading system, and not be seen again), not to mention that many Asians were wily tax-dodgers, as well as which a high proportion of them (compared to the White population) were collecting unemployment benefits (whilst simultaneously working in Asian businesses).
The Japanese had bought up much of Australia's real estate and businesses, and controlled much of the Japanese tourist trade within Australia. Some people said how great for the economy the Japanese tourist trade was, but they didn't realise that the Japanese operated their own economic whirlpool - Jap tourists flew in on Japanese airlines and went on Jap-owned tours and package holidays, which directed the Japs to Jap-owned shops, hotels, and restaurants (in which they could even use Japanese Yen to pay for goods and services). Economic rationalists said that Japanese investment was good for the country, but in fact it was bleeding our nation dry, and the Japanese - along with other foreign "investors" - were fast becoming the new economic masters of Australia.
During World War Two, the Japanese had said that they would win even if the war took one hundred years; one story was told that, after the surrender of the Japanese, a Prisoner Of War asked one of his Jap guards "What do you think of your hundred years war, now?", to which the Jap replied "Only 96 years to go"; and that was pretty much the case - what the Japanese had been unable to obtain by means of open warfare, they were achieving by economics. However, this Japanese economic colonisation was only possible via the use of Western technology, and because the liberal-internationalists (in particular, the economic rationalists) were allowing (in fact, encouraging) demographic and economic globalisation.
Karl had heard many people say how smart the Asians were, but he asked himself who invented computers, television, radio, aeroplanes, trains, cars, jet engines, petrol engines, steam engines, and penicillin? Who conquered polio, smallpox, and a whole host of other diseases and ailments? He also asked himself what kind of societies had they built in Asia? Most of the cities would look like slums in Western countries. If they were so smart, then why did they keep trying to migrate from societies built by Asians to societies built by Whites? Even though Asians are very smart on IQ tests and seem to do well in the medical and scientific professions, it was interesting to note that most of the important creative accomplishments that had been achieved over the last one thousand years were carried out by Whites. It annoyed Karl that the achievements of the White Race were taken for granted, when all these achievements formed the basis for Western Civilisation.
As far as Karl could see, the White Race had a capacity for creativity, culture, and civilisation that surpassed the Asiatic and Negroid races. IQ testing had shown that the median IQ for African Negroes is about 75 (or possibly less), American Negroes (who, generally, have a fair amount of "White blood" in them - perhaps the equivalent of one-quarter) have a median score of 85 (the IQ of mixed race students in South Africa has been found to be similar), the median score for Whites is approximately 100, and East Asians (Chinese, Japanese, Koreans) have a median score of about 103. There is usually no more than a slight variation between results of credible large-scale scientific tests, with a tentative consensus of 3 IQ points difference between Whites and East Asians, the Black-White difference being of one standard deviation (15 IQ points), and 1.7 standard deviations (25 IQ points) between African Blacks and Whites.
These results do not mean that there are no Black geniuses, but just that there are very few of them (especially on a pro-rata basis, as compared to Whites and Asians). Interestingly, while the White median IQ is slightly lower than the Asian median IQ level, the Asians are more tightly bunched on the IQ "bell curve" (meaning that there is a high proportion of them with an IQ result of around 100-103), whilst the "bell curve" of the Whites is more spread out (meaning that while there are many under 100, there is also a very high number well over 100), hence the White Race as a whole produces far more geniuses pro-rata than either the Negroes or the Asians - which would explain the intellectual quality of White civilisations.
Many people misunderstood the realities of race. If one spoke of the generally lower intelligence level of Negroes, a multiracialist would point to an example of a Black genius with a high IQ, as if that proved the race realist to be wrong; whereas, in actual fact, race realism is basically about dealing with entire races. To say that the Black Race has a lower average IQ than the White Race is not to say that there are no clever Black people, but that there are proportionately more clever White people. Indeed, to say that the Black Race has more top-level boxers than the White Race is not to say there are no top-level White boxers, but just that there are proportionately more top-level Black boxers. The same scenario applied if one talked about White geniuses, weight lifters, and swimmers.
Race is a general concept, it does not hinge on one or two examples, or on one or two exceptions to an established rule; in talking about race, we are talking about each race as a whole. Race realism is about different characteristics and capabilities of different breeds, just as with other species; people could speak of Labrador dogs as being generally friendly and as good pets for children, and of American Pit Bull Terrier dogs as being good fighting dogs, and if you tried to tell most professional dog breeders that all Labradors and Pit Bulls were born equal, they would laugh at you (even though there would always be individual exceptions in the dog breeds). It didn't mean that all individuals were the epitome of their race; indeed, there were always many shades of grey (as in so many areas of life), but that didn't detract from the fact that there were general rules of characteristics that applied to all racial populations.
That so many people misunderstood the realities of race was a source of annoyance to Karl; however, he understood why they were ignorant of such realities, given the constant indoctrination and suppressing of unwelcome facts by the media and education system. Nonetheless, there was quite a bit of information available to people regarding the realities of racial matters; one of the best non-technical books that Karl had read that covered the subject was My Awakening by David Duke.
What really irked Karl was the cosmopolitans' portrayal of primitive peoples as somehow more "spiritual" or "wise" than Whites. This was just Hollywood-style idiocy. The primitive peoples had been nothing more than savage barbarians, often practising headhunting, infanticide, and cannibalism. There was nothing "spiritual" about this. And the tracking abilities of such Stone-Age cultures was nothing special either. The White peoples used to employ such methods eons ago, until they invented farming, and developed cities.
Karl remembered listening to some fool anthropologist who described how some Eskimo tribes would "throw bones" to determine the direction in which to hunt for caribou, and thus would often not find the caribou herds - this anthropologist had marvelled at how the Eskimos had preserved the ecological balance by this method, as it meant the caribou herds would not be over-hunted. What a complete idiot - the plain facts were that those ignorant Stone Age Eskimos actually believed that the bones would point them in the right direction. If they could have found the caribou herds every time, then they would have done so.
In a similar manner, it irked Karl when liberalistic fools heaped praise upon the Australian Aborigines as having "a special relationship with the land". Obviously, such fools hadn't been to the Aboriginal settlements in the north of Australia; even though many of these were self-administered by the Aborigines themselves, many of these communities always looked as though they'd just been hit by a bomb: badly damaged buildings (funded by Aussie taxpayers, demolished by Abo drunks), with piles of rubbish scattered all over the place, adding to the lamentably low hygiene standards. The Aborigines once knew how to live off the land (although most nowadays live in the cities - many of whom now only knew how to live off unemployment benefits), just as the Stone Age White tribes once lived off the land - but our race grew out of that infantile stage, into the full adulthood of civilisation. It was the ignorant Aborigines who had burnt out so much of Australia (they used burning off of trees and grassland to scare animals out of the bush into their clutches and cooking pots - well, actually, they didn't have pots, as they hadn't actually made it from the Stone Age to the Iron Age) - it was this burning off which reduced so much of our once well-forested land to barren desert. Special relationship with the land, my foot.
From what Karl had read, he could see that there were three different types of races: culture creators, culture bearers, and culture destroyers. The White Race was obviously a culture creator, with all of its accomplishments; some Asiatic races, such as the Japanese and the Chinese, were culture bearers, with the ability to produce and maintain civilisations at a certain level; and the Negroes and the Australian Aborigines were culture destroyers, who seemed unable to build or maintain civilisations, at least not past a certain level.
White Western Civilisation had proven itself superior, and more refined, in comparison to all other civilisations. One only needed to consider technology, engineering, housing, roads, music, musical instruments, dancing, writing, research, farming, hunting, weaponry, communications, exploration, etc.
There was only one area where White civilisation had fallen down - that of racial survival. By that standard, the Blacks and the Asians had shown themselves to be superior. On the current trends, the White Race was headed for extinction, the world would become dominated by the mud races, and White Civilisation would eventually collapse, cough, and die. Maybe - if we were lucky - the White Race might be remembered in some future Asiatic history book; as an aside, or as a footnote, there could be a mention of a race that had produced the most advanced civilisation ever known to mankind, that had taught the other races many things, but that had been soft, stupid, and liberalistic to the point where it had allowed itself to be overrun and extinguished.
So, would Karl call himself a White Supremacist? No. If the White Race was facing extinction, then it was hardly supreme.
All over the world the Whites were heading in the same direction - of becoming minorities in their own lands. Australia was fast becoming a Eurasian country, with full Asianisation following soon after. Karl had read that it was known even back in the 1990s that the Whites in the USA would be a minority in their own country by 2060, and he was living through the fulfilment of that prophecy (by 1998, the White proportion of the US population had already dropped to 73.6%). The South Africans had stupidly thrown in the towel, and were only a small minority in what had - under Black rule - fast become a Third World "Banana Republic". Europe was swamped by Third World immigrants up to its eyeballs. Every White country was turning Yellow or Black. Iceland was the last homogeneous White country to hold out, but even there the seeds of multiracialism had taken hold, and no doubt Iceland too would eventually succumb to the mud races. Way back in 1998, the White Race had dropped to an estimated 8% of the world's population, and by now it was only a fraction of that figure.
The Greenies would talk about the survival of the whale, but surely the extinction of one of the human sub-species (or full species, depending on your zoological definition) was far more important? Save the whales? Save the Whites!!!
Integration and miscegenation via immigration, multiculturalism, and liberalistic brainwashing was bringing about the destruction of the White Race. Genocide by race-mixing was much more effective than genocide by bullets. And this is the vital point: the White Race is facing genocide!! Unless, of course, those Whites who had the intelligence to recognise what was going on, and the internal strength and fortitude to stand up and fight, could overcome the odds and reclaim their People from impending Racial Genocide. It was in the hands of people like Karl that the responsibility lay to halt this destruction of the White Race - to stop this ultimate crime against humanity.
* * * * * * *
One of Karl's friends had once explained his theory that the White Race was God's chosen people, and that the Asians and Blacks were only present on the earth as a way of "testing" Whites. Mind you, another friend had once told Karl that the Blacks, with all their music and dancing, had only been created to entertain Whites - Karl found this to be a highly dubious theory, albeit a somewhat amusing one.
One of Karl's Christian friends had once said that if God had wanted the world to be populated entirely by hordes of swarthy, greasy, brown people, then that's how he would have made it. Instead of Adam and Eve, the Garden of Eden would have been inhabited by Achmed the camel driver and Ming Lee the Vietnamese prostitute.
There were many references in the Bible to prohibitions against race-mixing, and Karl's friend maintained that the true translation of the commandment against adultery was in fact a directive against inter-racial marriages and miscegenation (in the Bible, in chapter twenty of Exodus, the "thou shalt not commit adultery" commandment was kept separate and distinct from the commandment "thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife"). Whether this interpretation was actually correct, Karl didn't know, but nonetheless he recognised the basics of his friend's theory.
Karl didn't have a lot of time for organised religion. The Churches had taken such an active role in the promotion of multiracialism and multiculturalism, had often advocated large-scale immigration, and had featured prominently amongst those who were actively undermining the White Australia Policy in the 1960s. Maybe it was because of such anti-White attitudes being prevalent amongst the Church hierarchies that so many in the Movement were non-religious; although there were also many Christians in the Movement as well. It was a pity that the old-style Christian leaders were not around any more - the no-nonsense types that preached traditional Christianity; not the "turn the other cheek" and "love your neighbour until you suffocate" types, but the "Praise the Lord, and pass the ammunition" clerics, who gave staunch support to the White Australia Policy.
Whether Karl was a Christian or not, he knew that you didn't have to be a religious person to understand that the ideology of multiracialism was a crime against Nature, and was inherently evil.
The multiracialists painted their ideology, their views, as "nice"; advocating "diversity" and "tolerance". But the opposite was the case. What the multiracialist ideology sought was destruction: to destroy the Australian way of life with multiculturalism, to destroy the Australian People with Asianisation, to destroy the entire White Race with multiracialism. And, even if the multiracialists did or didn't realise it, if the White Race was destroyed, it meant the eventual demise of Western Civilisation as well.
Turning the world's population into an amorphous brown mass, with no racial differences, was in fact the very antithesis of diversity, but the liberal-internationalists were too bigoted and too blind to be able to see the long term consequences of their actions. The logical consequence of a world-state, with mass interactive migration and mass media communication, would be the creation of a world-wide culture and a world-wide mongrel people; hence, no more distinctive racial or cultural diversity. However, the globalists could not see past their noses to such a future - a future that would expose them as both idiots and hypocrites.
As for "tolerance", while the liberal-internationalists were "tolerant" of all kinds of perverts, as well as of any weird ethnic customs, they were hugely intolerant of anyone who was opposed to their world-view, and would stop at nothing destroy such opposition, whether it was to arrange boycotts to destroy someone's business, trying to get someone sacked, character assassination via the media, or outright violence - these so-called "liberals" were more intolerant than any bigot they ever portrayed on their TV soap operas. Various liberals and academics, who - with a "holier than thou" attitude - prided themselves on their belief in "free speech" and "free discussion", would become as reactionary as the most jack-booted Bolshevik thug if anyone dared attack their "sacrosanct" globalist opinions. It was truly a case of "free speech for me, but not for thee".
Multiculturalist liberalism is an ideology that is more oppressive than the tyranny of communism or fascism, but more cleverly so. It dresses itself up as a "reasonable" ideology, and paints its opponents as extremist, racist, mad, or downright evil. In liberal-run education systems, liberalism is not portrayed as just one of many ideologies, but as "the norm", against which there is no "reasonable" alternative. Yet, liberalism is far from reasonable; it uses social, political, legal, and physical force against its opponents. Just as in the Soviet Union or in Nazi Germany, dissidents against the liberal-internationalist System are threatened first with social ostracism and loss of their jobs, then with physical violence and/or imprisonment. Anyone promoting ideas of nationalism or racial realism is considered to be a "heretic", and hence dangerous to the System. Just as happened to Galileo and Solzhenitsyn, Nationalists in many Western countries are thrown into jail for promoting or publishing ideas considered "dangerous" by the State. Many Nationalists have been imprisoned, not for carrying out violent acts, or even threatening violence, but simply for publishing their opinions on the inequality of races, or for opposing non-White immigration and multiracialism.
The hypocrisy of the liberal-internationalists was clearly self-evident to anyone who opened their eyes. If an Abo were to say "I'm Aboriginal, I'm proud of it, and I want my race to survive", he would be cheered; if a Negro were to say "I'm African, I'm proud of it, and I want my race to survive", he would be applauded; if an Asian were to say "I'm Chinese, I'm proud of it, and I want my race to survive", he would be congratulated; but if a White were to say "I'm White, I'm proud of it, and I want my race to survive", he would be attacked, vilified, and demonised - "You evil racist" the globalists would shout, "how dare you promote White supremism and hatred!", and many of them would demand that the "racial heretic" be fined or jailed.
So, why the different reactions? Basically, it is because multiracialist liberal-internationalism is an anti-White ideology, inclusive of much anti-White hatred and self-hatred.
The globalists were relentless in their advocacy of multiracialism, demanding a Eurasian Australia, or promoting their aim of the entire earth populated by a raceless "brown man" - the whole world's population consisting entirely, and only, of "coffee coloured people by the score".
What sort of evil was this? What sort of sick, bitter, or twisted minds would seek to destroy their own People? Who would promote an ideology that advocated the disappearance of their own Race?
It was apparent that this self-destructive psychosis was the child of liberalistic internationalism, which had further spawned the infamous White Guilt Complex. In essence, the idea behind the White Guilt Complex was that the Whites had the most money and highest standard of living in the world, whilst the coloured races had little money or comforts, and that the Whites had exploited the "poor coloureds".
The White Race had built a privileged place for itself in the world, and for that it was to be condemned by the forces of liberal-internationalism. The globalists often made plaintive cries about the historical utilisation of the mud races by Whites (actually, such utilisation was usually carried out by big-business interests, rather than by the common White people). Although it should be acknowledged that Whites had benefited from much mule-work that had been carried out by non-Whites at the behest and direction of Whites ("Oppression and exploitation" cry the globalists - mind you, the Whites simultaneously culturally and economically advanced such mud nations, and slashed the muds' adult and infant death rates), at the same time it should also be acknowledged that White civilisation would have advanced without it anyway.
Probably more to the point was that White people generally enjoyed a better standard of living than did non-Whites; that while Whites were enjoying abundant food, entertainment, and technology (all of which were a product of White Civilisation) there were Africans and Asians that were starving to death - and this made the globalists feel guilty (especially those in the high income areas of the Traitor Class), bringing upon them the classic White Guilt Complex, leading to racial self-hatred and the anti-White stance of liberal-internationalists. Hence the anti-White double-standard.
Of course, it was never mentioned that the Whites had a higher standard of civilisation even before they began colonisation in Asia and Africa. Heaven forbid that one would compare the differing productive and intellectual capacities of different races - or, at least, the globalists would forbid it. Nor was it ever mentioned that the mud races attained a higher standard of living via the Whites, nor was it mentioned that whenever the Whites gave control of a country over to the coloureds that it would usually either decline in overall standards (becoming very corrupt, chaotic, and often barbaric), or become some sort of authoritarian banana republic. Yet, even with self-governing Third World countries, everything was somehow painted as the fault of the Whites.
One of the best guilt-inducing tactics used by the globalists was that relating to slavery, particularly useful in ideologically bludgeoning American Whites, but it was often extended as a guilt trip to Whites of all nations. Of course, it was never mentioned that the Blacks in Africa had enslaved other Blacks for centuries before the Whites had ever taken any African slaves to America, also that the American slave trade depended on buying Black slaves from other Black Africans (as well as which, the Arabs were very active in the slave trade). Nor was it mentioned that slavery used to be a common thing, practised by all races. Indeed, there were many Whites who were used as slaves - many were sold into servitude in America; as well as which, during the Industrial Revolution, not only were White children sent down into the coal mines, but many were chained to machinery in factories to keep them at work (The Forgotten Slaves: Whites in Servitude in Early America and Industrial Britain, by Michael Hoffman, was very instructive in this little-taught area of White slavery). Also, many free American Blacks later owned slaves; between 1830 and 1860, there were 3,500 Black slave owners who owned over 10,000 Black slaves.; they owned plantations alongside White slave owners, they often ran adverts in the papers trying to locate their "runaways", and kept journals which showed they treated their slaves no differently than White slave owners. It should not be forgotten that it was, in fact, the Whites who did the most to put an end to the bulk of the slave trade - even though this was a trade being practised by all races. Nor should one forget the "White slave trade" of modern times, whereby Whites - White women in particular - are kidnapped into slavery for slave masters in the Middle East and North Africa. Nowadays, there is much slavery still in existence, however, the bulk of the slave industries are to be found in Asia, where multiple generations would work for the same master, family, or company - there still exists tens of thousands of slaves in the Third World. One historian noted that "There was nothing uniquely Western or uniquely White about slavery, only the abolition of slavery is Western!"
The White Guilt Complex was something maintained and extended by biased educators and the media, both of which kept the White masses in ignorance of the relevant history and facts; continually suppressing inconvenient facts and views, and airing only those views that were suited to their liberalistic ideology (the bulk of the globalists' brainwashing propaganda was put about via the medium of entertainment - through television and cinema). It was up to all Whites to escape from the clutches of this insidious liberalistic brainwashing, and free themselves from the mental chains that bound them.
* * * * * * *
Karl knew, in his heart of hearts, that the survival of the White Race was of paramount importance, and this was why he was risking himself to fight for the White Australia Policy. If he had lived at the time when the White Australia Policy was still operational, when its truths were self-evident, then maybe it wouldn't have been so important to him. Maybe it was just like democracy - that it seems of little importance while it exists and is operational, but when it disappears under the hobnailed boots of communism or fascism (or authoritarian multiculturalism), then you realise just how important and vital it was ("you don't know what you've got till it's gone").
Karl wasn't sure whether to consider himself a racist or not. He had originally considered a racist to be someone who promotes the cause and furtherance of his race, just as a Nationalist promotes the cause and furtherance of his nation; but the word had been twisted and distorted by the liberal-internationalists (those in the media, in particular), into a term describing racial hatred.
Karl had no hatred in his heart for the non-Whites, indeed, he had met many who were nice people, and many others who were quite likeable (although, of course, he had met many who were not); it wasn't a case of "some of my best friends are Asians", as Karl had made it a personal policy not to become close friends with any non-Whites, so as to avoid any compromising with his belief in White Australia. He felt that promotion of inter-racial friendships in a multiracial society only encouraged wider inter-racial interaction in the community as a whole, which in turn would lead to inter-racial relationships and then to miscegenation. In an Australia that was becoming increasingly multi-racial, it was getting rarer to obtain work in companies that didn't employ non-Whites, and hence Karl had worked in some places with Asians and Blacks; whilst many of them were nice people (several of whom he was friendly with within work-related environs), that didn't mean that Karl should give up his belief in White Australia - just because there were nice non-Whites was no reason for the White Race to just give up, roll over, and die. Racial Nationalism was a question of a racial struggle against impending genocide, not a question of nice Whites versus bad Blacks and Asians (the latter question would be nonsensical). The fight for the White Race was not a matter of hate, but a matter of SURVIVAL. The only people that Karl actually hated were those globalist traitors who had sold out both the White Australia Policy and the White Race in general.
The fight for White Australia was based upon love - a love for one's own people, and a wish that the White Race be not destroyed by miscegenation. However, it could not be denied that a large number of Nationalists now hated gooks, although this was because Australia was being swamped by Asians; but, if a White Australia Policy was in place, then undoubtably these same people would not hate the Asian tourists coming here - it was just a matter of hating those who were destroying their way of life, their People, and their Nation. Although often derided by liberals, hate could be a positive emotion, one that could give strength and determination to those who had to fight - whether it was fighting the invading Japanese of World War Two, or fighting the Yellow Peril swamping Australia in modern times. Nonetheless, it appeared that most Nationalists didn't hate the Asians who were coming into the country (even though they were determined to rid Australia of them); they realised that the Asians in Australia were merely a symptom, and a tool, of liberal-internationalism - it was the politicians, and the rest of the Traitor Class, who were at fault for bringing the Third Worlders into the country in the first place.
If Karl couldn't be described as a racist, then he certainly couldn't be described as a bigot. A bigot was someone who held irrational beliefs based upon misconception, ignorance, fear, or hatred: "All Vietnamese eat dogs", "I hate Asians, but Filipinos are okay", "All Chinese are involved with street gangs or the Triads", "The Japs are a horrible sadistic lot who murdered Aussie POWs during the war"; all these were the foolish rantings of typical bigots - while there was some truth in many of their views (and even sometimes a lot of truth), they weren't correct overall, and could easily be proven to be wrong. It was illogical to hold such prejudices; Karl was not prejudiced against Asians (he knew there was both good and bad in all races), it was just that he did not want them swamping his country - this was not a matter of pre-judging, but was a matter of preference (and of racial survival). Karl had seen how easy it could be for a bigot to be turned into a multiracialist, because such bigoted beliefs were provably foolish, easily overcome, and usually not deeply held; sometimes when faced with a nice Jap or an educated Vietnamese, the bigot's foundations would crumble into dust. Karl had even seen bigots who married "mail order brides" from the Philippines; once, many years ago, whilst handing out leaflets against Asianisation, one such bigot - complete with Asian bride and half-breed children in tow - had told him that there were too many Asians being let into the country. Such people were beneath contempt.
Karl was not what would be described as a "White Supremacist". Supremacism indicated the desire to have control over others. Karl just wanted the White Race to be free of the influence of the other races; more to the point, he just wanted his People, his Race, to survive. One of Karl's acquaintances described himself as being, not a Supremacist, but rather a "Superiorist", who believed "that the White race is unique, gifted and foreordained by the Big Guy Upstairs to be His people, that the other races have nothing to offer us but Chinese food and jazz... we're better than the Muds by leaps and bounds in any field you care to name, and that we taint ourselves by letting them live among us."
Some Nationalists described themselves as Racial Separatists, to signify that they believed in a separation of the races into different parts of the world. However, some people took the "Racial Separatist" term to mean a "all blacks should sit down the back of the bus" type of racism, whilst the media just described such Separatists as "racists" or "White supremacists" anyway. Others described themselves as "White preservationists", which indicated exactly what they were seeking - racial preservation, or racial survival.
Karl would normally describe himself as a Racial Nationalist, or simply as a Nationalist (the latter, in its true sense, was inclusive of Racial Nationalism). However, although most White "racists" were Racial Nationalists, Karl had met some who were internationalists, who argued that Nationalism was an ideology which led to wars between White nations, which then decimated the White Race, and that Whites would be better off living under an international state; Karl regarded such arguments as dubious and highly debatable, but he could see where they were coming from. However, such people could not be described as Racial Nationalists. "Racist" was the best word to describe those who believed in the furtherance and the survival of their Race, but it was a pity that the globalists had so successfully twisted its commonly accepted meaning into "race hater".
The liberal-internationalists in the media would usually describe, as a matter of course, anyone who defended the rights of the White Race as a racist, supremacist, hate-monger, neo-Nazi, extreme right-winger, or any other number of labels. Aside from recognising that journalists, especially when producing stories about Racial Nationalists, were habitual liars and deliberate defamers, many of them probably didn't even know what they were talking about when they described all Racial Nationalists as "extreme right-wingers" - it was of interest to actually note that there were many "right-wingers" and "left-wingers" (insofar as the right/left wing dichotomy was applicable) who were Racial Nationalists. The Movement included people who were economically conservative, as well as people who were socialists. Many in the Movement talked of multiracialism as a by-product of big-business and international finance, and who spoke of the anti-national threat of capitalism gone wild. Some saw multiracialism as just another extension of capitalism, whether it was the 19th century capitalists wanting coolie labour, or the 20th and 21st century capitalists wanting cheap labour and an expanded consumer base. Indeed, there were some who maintained, in line with the origins of the phrase "left-wing", whereby those who were opposed to the Establishment sat on the left of the French Assembly, that all Racial Nationalists should be called "left-wingers", as they were the only true significant opposition to the existing order.
It was also interesting to note that, within the ranks of the Movement, there were some who had, in the past, been active in providing assistance to Third World countries, in order to stop mass suffering; but now these same people were being described as racists or race-haters.
The word "racist" had become so twisted by the liberal-internationalists, that it seemed to have lost any real meaning.
That's just the way it was with these multiculturalist scum; their ideology was so perverted that such devious means came naturally to them. Another example of such twisting of words was the way that the media had turned the common usage of "gay", from meaning "happy", into meaning "homosexual". The liberalistic attitude towards homos was typical of a sick society, where everything that was truly perverted became acceptable - if not actually desirable. The plain fact was that it was unnatural for someone to have sex with a person of the same sex (homosexuality), just as it was unnatural for someone to have sex with a dead person (necrophilia), or with a sheep or a horse (bestiality) - all these things were perverted, no matter how much the liberals tried to rationalise or defend any of them. A favourite psycho-tactic of the liberals was to proclaim that anyone who attacked homos too much was quite possibly a latent homosexual - a very clever way to shut up your opposition. Did that mean that anyone who opposed sex with animals was a latent practitioner of bestiality? Similar tactics were used by the liberals on the political scene - anyone who attacked immigration or multiculturalism was accused of being a bigot or a racist - again, a very clever way to silence your opponents.
This was typical of liberal-internationalists; they played devious mind games, utilised "thin edge of the wedge" tactics, and appeared as wolves in sheep's clothing. The twisting of so many words, like "racist", was parallel with the tactic of incorporating "political correctness" into everyday language, whereby so many words were being - in effect - socially outlawed, whether it was chairman ("chairperson"), poofter/homo ("same-gender orientated"), or spastic/mongoloid ("physically challenged" or "intellectually challenged") - if it wasn't so serious, it would be downright funny.
There was a message that many people overlooked when reading George Orwell's 1984. While everyone understood his warnings about Big Brother (although most failed to recognise it when it was happening to them, bit by bit, drip by drip), most missed his cautioning against the deconstruction of society's natural language. Political correctness and its hideous new socio-political language was an Owellian prophecy come true.
Karl didn't care what the globalists called him. Despite the barbs of his enemies, and the laxness of the masses, Karl knew he had a duty - to save Australia.
Previous Chapter - - - Next Chapter
Contents