The Trouble With Conservatism

Dr. Pierce predicted today’s shift to the right by Jews — and the fatal flaw in conservative groups like the Tea Party movement.

by Dr. William L. Pierce

LAST YEAR a group of sick, guilt-ridden Dutch liberals in the Netherlands formed an anti-racist group, the Person-to-Person Committee, for the purpose of fighting apartheid among the Dutch-descended Afrikaners of South Africa. They distributed packets of postcards to Dutch schoolchildren, each card bearing a printed message attacking apartheid and a photograph of an alleged “atrocity” by South Africa’s police and defense forces against Black “freedom fighters.” Each schoolchild was asked to add his return address and sign his name to the postcard and then mail it to an Afrikaner chosen at random from a South African telephone directory.

The South African response to this poison-pen campaign was to organize the Afrikaans-Dutch Working Group, which prepared its own postcards to be mailed back to the Dutch children. Each card bore a photograph of South Africa’s renowned heart-transplant pioneer, Professor Christiaan Barnard, holding and comforting a Negro baby. The printed message on the card was: “We are not the Black-haters many of you think we are.”

When I read the account of this episode in a recent issue of the South African Digest, a weekly public-relations magazine published by the South African government, I thought to myself, “How typically conservative!”

In fact, the pride with which the postcard ploy was related meshes perfectly with the whole tone of the conservative South African government’s stance toward its critics. Each issue of the South African Digest is filled with articles which say, in effect, what the Barnard postcard said. They cite example after example of new concessions to Blacks; of millions of dollars of White South Africans’ tax money being spent on shiny, new schools and hospitals for Blacks; of a 500 per cent increase in the wages of Black workers in the mining industry between 1970 and 1977; of the step-by-step dismantling of the South African policy of apartheid.

They say to the world: “Look how good we are to our Blacks. We are not racists. We only want what is best for all South Africans, Black and White. We don’t shoot Black terrorists and rioters for being Black but only for being communists and lawbreakers. We have a conservative, law-and-order, anti-communist government.”

Learning to Get Along

by Dr. William L. Pierce

I SPOKE recently with an Alliance member just back from a year in Zaire (the former Belgian Congo). He is a government scientist who is obliged to spend most of his time in rather odd places: African jungles, Arabian deserts, polar icecaps, and the like. While in Zaire he took advantage of every opportunity to avail himself of White company, which is all too scarce there, and he became intimately familiar with the attitudes and ways of thinking of the permanent White residents of that country. The story he told me about his experiences chilled my blood — the more so because it had the solid ring of truth and agreed with reports from other places, such as Rhodesia (now “Zimbabwe”). (ILLUSTRATION: Whites joining Blacks in cheering for anti-White policies in South Africa)

What our member said, in essence, is that the Whites in Zaire have “gone native.” After two weeks of work in the bush, our member would return to Kinshasa hungry for the sight of a White face. But the Whites, in the part of Kinshasa which used to be Leopoldville, outnumbered now more than 100 to one by Blacks, have managed to blend into the landscape so thoroughly that one can only pick them out of the Black crowds by the color of their skin; nothing else distinguishes them. One of them will pass another White on the sidewalk — perhaps the only other White he has encountered all day — without even a glance. To accost one of them is almost an affront; the attitude is, “Why should I stop to talk with you? You are nothing special to me.”

Learning to Get Along

by Dr. William L. Pierce

I SPOKE recently with an Alliance member just back from a year in Zaire (the former Belgian Congo). He is a government scientist who is obliged to spend most of his time in rather odd places: African jungles, Arabian deserts, polar icecaps, and the like. While in Zaire he took advantage of every opportunity to avail himself of White company, which is all too scarce there, and he became intimately familiar with the attitudes and ways of thinking of the permanent White residents of that country. The story he told me about his experiences chilled my blood — the more so because it had the solid ring of truth and agreed with reports from other places, such as Rhodesia (now “Zimbabwe”). (ILLUSTRATION: Whites joining Blacks in cheering for anti-White policies in South Africa)

What our member said, in essence, is that the Whites in Zaire have “gone native.” After two weeks of work in the bush, our member would return to Kinshasa hungry for the sight of a White face. But the Whites, in the part of Kinshasa which used to be Leopoldville, outnumbered now more than 100 to one by Blacks, have managed to blend into the landscape so thoroughly that one can only pick them out of the Black crowds by the color of their skin; nothing else distinguishes them. One of them will pass another White on the sidewalk — perhaps the only other White he has encountered all day — without even a glance. To accost one of them is almost an affront; the attitude is, “Why should I stop to talk with you? You are nothing special to me.”

Subversion in South Africa

Since the fall of apartheid in 1994, South Africa has increasingly become a locus of
slaughter, rape, torture, poverty, and Black-on-White genocide
-- with near-zero coverage from the mass media.

by Dr. William L. Pierce

THE AMERICAN press in recent months has carried a number of reports of protests by South African students against their government’s policy of racial separation, or apartheid. “White Students Rebelling Against Government Discrimination,” the Reuters reports shriek, followed by vivid accounts of truncheon-wielding policemen wading into crowds of peacefully protesting students and brutally cracking skulls left and right. One news story told of policemen chasing students from the University of Cape Town who sought refuge in St. George’s Cathedral, battering them senseless, and dragging them out, leaving pools of blood among the pews.

An Act of Conscience

From National Vanguard magazine No. 104, March-April 1985

A member of the National Alliance who is a law student wrote the following report on a recent act of conscience he committed in Washington D.C. He will remain unnamed here, so that he can finish his law studies unmolested and then participate even more forcefully in the struggle for a racially progressive future.

---

Enough is enough, I told myself, as I read the announcement on my school's bulletin board: “Law Student Anti-Apartheid Demonstration at South African Embassy. Racism Must End. Point of contact: E. Cohen.” Anti-apartheid demonstrations had been occurring continuously at the South African embassy for nearly six months; it was now, it appeared, law students' turn to perform their duty.

These demonstrations had angered me from the beginning, but this particular one was more than I could stomach. The more I reflected on the large role played by the Jews – many of them staunch Zionists – in the demonstrations and on the total prostration, the total lack of racial pride, among my fellow White law students, the less I was able to ignore what was going to happen. I finally decided that I would attend the demonstration – to demonstrate against it.

I spent the day before the demonstration at my house preparing two placards. One of them read: “Stop the Anti-White Double Standard.” The other read: “Why No Protests Against Israel's Human Rights Violations?” I also went to the Library of Congress, where I prepared the text for a leaflet detailing human rights violations in Black African countries and in Israel. I did not presume I could reawaken any White racial pride in the benighted souls of the White demonstrators, but I thought I could at least point out the hypocrisy of their actions.

I showed up at the demonstration with my placards and my leaflets, expecting to see a dozen or so of the students from my law school. I was astonished to encounter a loud and swirling mass of some 200-300 demonstrators marching on both sides of Connecticut Avenue, carrying placards, and shouting slogans. The demonstration, it turned out, had been coordinated among all the law schools in the Washington area – there are six or seven – and among young working lawyers as well.

I surveyed the scene for a moment. I knew I would get lost in the crowd if I went too far into it. An idea occurred to me. The demonstrators on one side of the avenue were marching in a large, elongated circle, which extended out onto a nearby bridge. I took up a position on the bridge about 15 feet from the point where the circle broke to go back in the other direction. I held my placard about Israel in front of me. Every person in that circle was obliged to read it.

Somewhat surprisingly, there was very little reaction. Most of the protesters read my placard in silence. A couple of the Blacks raised their fists and said: “Right on, brother!” There were only two comments from the Whites/Jews that I heard. One said, “Who's paying you?” Another said, “The old divide-and-conquer technique, eh?” After a few minutes a fellow with black, curly hair, who was apparently an Arab, broke away from the circle and came over to me. He said, “Man, I don't think this is the right way to raise the people's consciousness.” We proceeded to argue about whether it was appropriate for me to do what I was doing where I was doing it.

At this point a Black woman with a megaphone decided to extend the marcher's circle further onto the bridge. This had nothing to with me, but it was clear that I was in the way. I decided to stay where I was. No problem: the circle just formed around me. I spent the next ten minutes or so holding my placard in the middle of the circle, as the demonstrators marched around me.

At length I decided, somewhat dejectedly, that I wasn't really accomplishing anything. I thought I would do better to show my placards to the cars passing on Connecticut Avenue, so I extricated myself from the circle and took up a position toward the far end of the bridge, facing the traffic. I held up my other placard, about the anti-White double standard. But this was an even more discouraging experience: in very few of the passing cars did I see a White face. Black, Brown, Oriental – are there no Whites left in Washington?

I decided to go home. As I began walking to my car, still carrying my placard, I saw a small Japanese car and four people, two men and two women, who appeared to be White, gathered around it. When I came closer I realized their car had a flat tire, which the younger man was changing. I saw them reading my placard. At last, I thought, I'm getting a message to some Whites. I smiled toward them as I walked by. But after I had passed them I heard the young man's voice: “I know where I can get you some free psychiatric help.”

I walked on for about ten feet, while what he had said sank in, I stopped. I turned around and walked back to their car, where I took up a position about six inches from the younger man. I looked into his pale blue eyes and chubby face: “What did you say?”

“I said you need psychiatric help.”

“Why did you say that?”

“Because I don't agree with you.”

“You must be infallible, then.”

“Leave me alone.”

I slugged him. He stepped back against the car, and the older man stepped between us. The younger man then took a further step backwards and cried out: “Leave me alone!”

I spat out my revulsion: “You're the sick one!” Then I walked away.

Back in my car I sat for a long while, thinking, wondering, doubting. Had I accomplished anything? In the distance I could hear the chants of the demonstrators: “Down with apartheid!”