Thanks to the Jews, the meaning of freedom has been distorted over the years. Currently freedom of speech and freedom of association are considered "bad" while freedom for homosexual marriage is considered "good." Likewise, the Statue of Liberty which was originally a gift from France commemorating representative government is now considered to mean freedom for unlimited Third World immigration.
Hello, and welcome to this edition of American Dissident Voices, an outreach program of the National Alliance. I'm your host and Chairman of the Alliance, Erich Gliebe.
Here in America, for as long as there have been people who have spoken out against any of the forces or events that seemed to threaten the well-being of White people, there have been critics who have claimed that Whites with racialist tendencies are nothing but unintelligent and misguided bigots. Particularly since the mid-19th Century -- when the abolitionist movement took root in the United States -- every pro-White patriot in this country has been considered by anti-Whites to be a creature only barely human.
For example, it is common knowledge that there was a great effort on the part of abolitionists such as the wild-eyed nutcase John Brown to portray White Southerners as mindless and egotistical bigots. That effort paid off in the North, to some extent, and helped lead to the baleful period in our nation's history that almost no one seems to know anything about: the so-called Reconstruction of the South. I'm not going to launch into that topic today, but my point is that the perception among a substantial fraction of the White American population at that time that racially-aware Whites in the South were little more than vermin eventually led to all sorts of negative outcomes for many of our kinsfolk in the South.
The same picture of White racialists emerged again during the middle of the last century, when the so-called Civil Rights Era took place. The image of racially-aware Southern Whites as backward and ignorant Bible-beaters was broadcast across the country every night on television. The ill-concealed snickering by the media about racist White Christians having a Jew for a god didn't do anything to help in the way of consistency for the alleged pro-White viewpoint. So the passive TV-watchers from coast to coast came to accept the largely-incorrect conclusion that racism was for rednecks.
There's no doubt that SOME of the White Southerners during the Civil War and SOME of the White Southerners during the Civil Rights Era were dyed-in-the-wool redneck racists. Undoubtedly, there were some of them who just plain hated Blacks. But most racialist Whites just KNEW that racial mixing was wrong, and they knew that widespread freedom for Blacks would mean more integration and more miscegenation -- the mixing of divergent gene pools. These Southern Whites didn't have much of a philosophy behind their feelings, but something down deep told them that to mix the races was a mistake.
What WAS missing in these pro-White Southerners was the same thing that has largely been missing up and down the history of Western man: an explicit racialist philosophy that put the security and advancement of the race above all other things... material comforts, pleasure, even the well-being of individuals in the society. In fact, when societies focused too much on the individual -- to the detriment of the race -- bad things were on the horizon.
Not that any of that history mattered much to the media of the Civil Rights Era. By that time, the Jews had pretty much consolidated their grip over the news and entertainment media. They had captured most of the major newspapers by the 1930s and that power -- coupled with the Jewish influence on power-mad politicians such as Franklin D. Roosevelt -- was highly influential in drawing the United States into the Second World War.
Now the Jews didn't have television during the war, so they used the tools that were available, such as the egomaniac FDR. But by the time the Civil Rights Era really got rolling, the Jewish spin on every world event was pumped into nearly every home in America through television. Given that fact, events couldn't have turned out any other way than how they did: the Blacks were always portrayed with sympathy, the opposing Whites were always portrayed with contempt, popular opinion throughout the rest of the country was molded accordingly, and the segregation laws crumbled like dried-out sandcastles.
We've got to hand it to the Jews -- or certainly to far-sighted leaders among the Jews -- for having much more foresight than our people have had for at least the last few hundred years and perhaps longer. When kings and popes ruled Europe, Jews were prominent among the royal advisors, physicians, and diplomats. Others exerted a power far beyond their numbers by serving many royal houses as financiers.
When Jews saw the chance to leave the ghettoes of Eastern Europe and Asia for Staten Island during the late 18th and early 19th Centuries, they took the opportunity to come to the New World. And it wasn't long before selected ones of them started to buy their way into the big-city newspapers. When motion pictures came onto the scene, some Jews recognized the possibilities inherent in that medium and, in terms of the potential financial and power payoffs, they felt it was worth the gamble. And it turned out they were right.
It is a fact accepted by even the mainstream Whites who are best at toeing the Jewish party line that the stereotypical Jew has a special affinity for money. There is at least a grain of truth behind every stereotype, but there is more like a mountain of grain -- a Midwestern farmer's silo full, you might say -- of truth behind this one.
After the fall of the era of kings and popes in Europe, the Jews made an easy transition into the world of banking and international finance. It was common knowledge among careful observers that at the dawn of the 20th Century, Jewish international finance was a powerful force in world events. Certainly, there were world powers that were stronger, but Jewish finance might very well have been the most powerful force that operated on a "between nations" -- as opposed to a "within nations" -- basis.
For example, international Jewish finagling in Britain resulted in the Balfour Declaration, a commitment from Britain to create a Jewish state in Palestine. In return, international Jewish finagling in the U.S. repaid the favor by bringing America into the First World War as an ally of the British.
Even after World War I, the accusations of financial shenanigans by international Jewry ran rampant. The great American poet Ezra Pound, who is lauded by White racialists today as a champion of the Cause of the West, was more an enemy of international Jewish finance and usury than he was an Aryan racialist.
Hitler blamed Jewish financiers for the economic collapse of Germany after the First World War. He promised a German economy OF working Germans FOR working Germans, and it was the crest of THAT wave that carried him into power. There is no doubt that Hitler was a pan-Aryan racialist -- in Mein Kampf, he speaks highly of the Aryan element in the U.S. and even proposed an alliance with Aryan Britain, the country he had fought against as a corporal barely five years earlier -- but it was Hitler's economic policy that the rank-and-file German worker latched onto most. The fact that Hitler put Depression-era Germany back onto its feet -- in what even his harshest critics call "an economic miracle" -- suggests that his idea to take the reins of the economy away from the international Jewish power had some validity.
Even today, no one is surprised when a Jewish name comes up in the world of finance and cut-throat capitalism. Two names from a number of years ago that are most recognizable to astute observers of current events are Michael Milken and Ivan Boesky, both Jewish money-criminals who were unlucky enough to get caught scamming millions of dollars. On a separate but related note, Jews are also well-represented among lawyers and agents of superstars, where they do nothing to contribute to the national production of goods but still get to bring home a big paycheck.
So the foresight that the Jews have demonstrated for the entire period during which they have been in contact with Western civilization has been a real point in their favor. They started out in money, when money talked the most. When mass democracy started to grow in power, they branched out into the media. And always, they have managed to be the middle men, the men who were the bridges between other men. They've been the smooth-talking message-bringers and message-modifiers who molded the relationship between two other entities such that, whatever else happened, they secured a net benefit for themselves.
As a White racialist who'd like to think he's farsighted, I wish our leaders throughout history would have had a long-term racial vision, something akin to what it seems the Jews have. In fact, it isn't the Jews' long-term racial vision that I object to -- it isn't even JEWS that I object to, believe it or not, although I must admit that their actions really tick me off sometimes. What I object to is the Jews using other people, namely ours, as pawns in their plans to secure more money and security for themselves. Because THAT is what they are doing, no matter what they intend.
And what's worse than the Jews using our people -- and others, I'd add -- as cannon fodder is that they don't admit it. It's one thing for a shark to attack and consume a sea lion, but no one -- least of all the shark -- dares to suggest that a shark's dinner is good for the prey. I'm simplifying here, obviously -- I know that the shark's behavior serves to hold down the sea lion population, and all that other stuff about a marine "natural balance" -- but you understand the analogy: If one dares to suggest that the policies pushed by the Jews in the media and the government are detrimental to the life-needs of our people, one is bombarded with a chorus of denials, cat-calls, and accusations of "anti-Semitism" by the predominantly Jewish media. And far from admitting the true effects of their behavior on our people, the Jews loudly proclaim the alleged benefits.
"Freedom" is one of the most commonly asserted benefits of the multicultural insanity that is taking over the White world. Legalizing civil unions for homosexual couples allows them more "freedom" in their lives, we are told. Allowing more non-White immigrants allows them the "freedom" of opportunity to make the most of their lives. Twisted and decadent modern art is lauded as a celebration of the "freedom" of the artist's mind from the confining influences of order and decency. Any attack on civil unions, non-White immigration, or hideous modern art is labeled an attack on "freedom," and the attacker is labeled an enemy of "freedom."
It is interesting to contrast the "freedom" promoted by the Jewish media with other freedoms that our people are less able to enjoy these days. One of these freedoms is freedom of speech, which our racial kinsmen in countries like Canada, Germany, Austria, and others no longer enjoy with regard to subjects that the Jews consider to be touchy, such as questioning the official version of the so-called Holocaust. In America, the increased dialogue over the last ten years about so-called "hate speech" laws is indicative of the freedom of speech being hemmed in, even here in the Western hemisphere, where complete freedom in that department is supposed to be our greatest and crowning achievement.
There are other individual freedoms, too, that are on their way out, such as the one involving the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution: the right of the citizenry to keep and bear arms. As yet another example, the right of peaceful assembly has long been a freedom that our people have enjoyed, but I know from my close work with the young artists and fans of pro-White resistance music that that freedom has essentially disappeared in most of Europe, and it's "iffy" at best here in the United States.
But for most White racialists, it isn't the individual freedoms that concern us most. Yes, the curtailing of our individual freedoms is something to pay attention to, but it isn't the sort of thing that we really get fired up about. The freedoms that we care about most are the ones that affect our race as a whole; that is, the ones that determine the present health of the race and its prospects for the foreseeable future. So, although the loss in freedom an individual White experiences when his job is shipped off to Malaysia is a great injustice carried out under the flag of the Jews' version of "freedom," saving that one job is not the reason for the existence of the National Alliance and other legitimate pro-White organizations worldwide.
The National Alliance exists to free the White race from the tentacles that have latched on at every point to the body of our race and that are attempting to pull the body into the mire. For our race, we demand a reasonably large land area and the freedom to do what we want on it. We demand freedom from the influence of all other peoples, physically and spiritually. We demand the freedom to enjoy White government, White neighborhoods, White schools, and White workplaces. In short, we want the freedom to live in our own White world by White values.
And when we in the National Alliance have secured these collective freedoms for our people, the individual freedoms will follow in short order. In a society governed by a White racialist worldview, no longer will an individual White experience the loss in freedom TO BE HIMSELF that comes when small, brown people with strange accents begin to dominate the neighborhood, the school, or the workplace.
The present society's overwhelming pressure on that freedom -- the freedom to feel like one BELONGS -- is perhaps the most damaging factor affecting individual Whites, and it goes without saying that that pressure will disappear overnight in our racial homeland. In our new society, we will encourage White men and women to act as White men and women, and I don't think that any of us today will fully appreciate the energy that will flow throughout that society until it happens.
The lack of a consistent, unified, long-term, and racialist worldview has plagued our people for thousands of years. Fortunately, our other qualities and the relative separation of a substantial portion of our race from alien races have allowed us to survive up to the present day.
But that long-missing worldview is our Achilles' heel. When we were challenged by abolitionists in the 19th Century or by questioning Jews in the 20th, we didn't have answers, and we let the world that was within our grasp slip away. Today, with every other worldview denying the right of our people to the freedom to live by our own bent, the racialist worldview of the National Alliance stands as the only logical and consistent rallying point. It is the worldview of White freedom.
We ARE right. I challenge you to compare our values and claims with any others. Join us, and help us create that society of complete and total White freedom.
I'm Erich Gliebe, Chairman of the National Alliance, and thanks for being with me again today.
