Andy Warhol's Jewish Nose Job

Image and caption from ATTACK! tabloid issue No. 8, 1971:

This Andy Warhol advertisement for a Jewish nose job, titled "Before and After"
was auctioned off in New York last month. An "art" collector paid $21,000 for it

* * * * *

Comment by Will White Williams:

Readers who are familiar with the big Best of ATTACK! and National Vanguard tabloid-sized book will recognize the image and its caption, above, from page one of that volume.

I remember doing Google image searches for Before and After in the past and not finding anything. I'd never seen this "anti-Semitic" image anywhere else except in the BANV until recently in another Google search.

The painting was executed by Warhol in 1962 from a slightly different version he did in 1961. Both versions exhibited together in a photograph here.

The painting is now owned by the Museum Of Modern Art (MOMA), gifted by the Hollywood Jew/queer David Geffen in 1995.

While on the subject of Jews and Modern "art," among his many other modern "art" pieces, collector Geffen also sold Jackson Pollock's lovely drip splatter "No. 5, 1948" for $140 million through a Sotheby's auction in 2006, making it the most expensive painting ever sold at that time. Geffen had purchased the piece from another Jew, publishing magnate S.I. Newhouse, Jr., and reportedly sold it to Mexican mega-billionaire David Martinez Guzman.

The genius Pollack at work

Modern Art: Jewish at its core, just as Tom Wolfe pointed out in his The Painted Word, the first book I ever purchased from Dr. William Pierce's National Vanguard Books back around 1990. Though not a Jew, Pollack, a flaming alcoholic, was married to one, Lee Krasner, and promoted heavily by other Jews like "art" critics Harold Rosenberg, Leo Steinberg, and Clement Greenberg and "art" dealer Peggy Guggenheim. Wolfe described the nearly totally Jewish modern "art" scene as "Cultureburg."

W.W.W.

Where Are Our Heroes?

From ATTACK! tabloid, Issue No. 55, 1977:


The Men of the Alamo
by Dr. William L. Pierce

AS THE DUSK GATHERED in the early evening of March 5, 1836, William Travis mustered the 183 men under his command on the dusty plaza of the Alamo, a fortress-like former Spanish mission. As the assembled Texans listened intently, the lanky officer outlined the situation. He made explicit what everyone already knew: there was little hope of surviving the onslaught of the 4,000-strong Mexican army which surrounded the fortress. They could hope for no further relief.

Then he did something strange. As the men watched curiously, Travis drew his sword and traced a line in the dust along the front of the first rank. Now he offered the men a choice. If there was anyone among them who had been deceived as to the gravity of their circumstances – if there was anyone who wanted to make a break for it – they might leave without infringing their honor. But let those who would stand and die with Travis cross the line.

Micajah Autry, an itinerant scholar and poet from Tennessee, was first across the line. Davey Crockett, the legendary rifleman, quickly followed, and then James Bonham, the dashing horseman from South Carolina. As his wife Susannah watched from the shadows of the old mission’s wall, Almeron Dickinson, a blacksmith from Gonzalez turned artilleryman, crossed the line. The rest followed in a rush, whooping defiance of Mexican General Santa Anna and his horde.

Davy Crockett's Last Stand at the Alamo -
This detail of that painting was the cover
 for National Vanguard magazine #103,
 Jan-Feb, 1985    

Only two men remained behind the line. One of them, Jim Bowie, the storied knife-fighter, lay on a cot, desperately ill. He begged to be carried across, and two of his comrades quickly hefted him over the line.

Now only Moses (Louis) Rose, a Jewish mercenary from France, hung back. Bowie, who had earlier befriended Rose, called out weakly, “You seem not to be willing to die with us, Rose!”

Rose answered curtly, “No, I am not prepared to die, and I shall not do so if I can avoid it.” With that, he vaulted over the wall, stealthily made his way past the Mexican pickets, and vanished into the night. Some years later, he died uneventfully.

The next day the men of the Alamo won immortality.

Travis’s drawing of the line was only the most dramatic episode in the Alamo saga. At one time the details of the siege and fall of the Texas stronghold were well known to every White American. Even today the facade of the Alamo chapel (all that remains of the old mission) is a familiar picture. Movies and television shows, dating from an era in which the masters of Hollywood found a feigned patriotism expedient as well as profitable, have acquainted many with the externals of the story. The most significant aspects of the Texans’ gallant last stand, however, have been for a long time carefully veiled. They deserve to become once again the common possession of our people, and the bravery of the men of the Alamo deserves commemoration as long as our race endures.

The Texas Revolution, of which the battle of the Alamo was the most stirring event, was the inevitable result of the confrontation of two vastly different peoples. The immigrants from the United States whom Mexico had reluctantly allowed to settle Texas, which was then a part of Mexico, were overwhelmingly of northern European stock. The Texas historian T. R. Fehrenbach has described them as a “tall, very Caucasoid race, more raw-boned than wiry. They filled the ridges and valleys with fair-skinned people and blue-eyed children.”

Most of them had come from the southern and border states. There the settlers’ race-feeling, already strong, had been honed to a sharp edge in the murderous and incessant Indian wars and by their association with Black slaves, either as owners or as competitors in the labor market. These White men and women of Texas felt themselves to be the vanguard of their race, and they meant to wring their destiny, manifest or otherwise, from the plains and mountains which stretched across the remainder of the continent.

The Mexicans, who were mostly of Indian or mixed (mestizo) blood, regarded these “Anglo-Saxon barbarians” with increasing fear and resentment. The government had only allowed Texas to be settled from the United States after it had become clear that the native Mexicans from the south could not be induced to move to the sparsely settled northern province. As American farmers and ranchers poured into Texas after 1822, they quickly came to outnumber the small Mexican population. By 1830 the Mexican government had forbidden any further immigration from the growing giant to the north.

When Santa Anna converted his presidency into a dictatorship and abolished the constitution, which had provided for a federated rather than a centralized Mexican state, the Texans rose up. They quickly overwhelmed the smaller Mexican garrisons throughout the state and then seized the capital, San Antonio de Bexar, by storm, overpowering a large force commanded by Santa Anna’s brother-in-law, General Cos, in December 1835.

Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna was Mexico’s leading general as well as her most adroit politician. He had emerged as a national hero after repelling a Spanish attempt to reconquer Mexico at Vera Cruz in 1829. Monumentally vain and extravagant, the self-styled “Napoleon of the West” was nevertheless a dynamic organizer as well as a charismatic leader. He quickly assembled and drilled an army of 6,000 Mexican regulars, trained and led in accordance with the latest continental European principles. With this elite force he marched north from Saltillo, Mexico, at the end of January 1836, determined to crush the upstart American rebels and then settle the problem once and for all by a program of summary executions and mass deportations.

The reports which Santa Anna’s numerous sympathizers among San Antonio’s Mexican population brought him concerning the state of the city’s White garrison must have heightened the contempt the Mexican general felt for the abilities of the American fighting men. The force which had seized San Antonio the previous December had dwindled to fewer than a hundred men in January. Only a few dozen reinforcements augmented the detachment as the Mexicans made their way north. There was bad blood between the two top ranking Texans, with both Jim Bowie and William Barret Travis attempting to exercise command.

The Texans holding San Antonio had their strengths as well as their weaknesses, as Santa Anna and his men were to discover. The fighting spirit of those who remained was high. Most of them were volunteers from outside Texas whose elan, if anything, surpassed that of their Texas brethren.

At the defense, the American frontiersmen were among the most effective soldiers in the world. They fired their long Kentucky rifles with deadly accuracy at ranges up to 200 yards. At close quarters they were devastating with knife and tomahawk. A tendency toward indiscipline was counterbalanced by a self-reliance and a self-sufficiency not to be found among the Mexicans.

Nevertheless, Santa Anna nearly caught the Texans napping as he advanced to San Antonio on February 23. Travis, the nominal commander by virtue of his status as the senior regular officer, hadn’t thought the Mexicans capable of crossing the several hundred miles of arid plains between Saltillo and San Antonio so rapidly. Santa Anna, however, had driven his troops mercilessly, and as his advance guard swept into the city the Texans barely had time to retire to the shelter of the Alamo.

The Alamo had been built as a mission to the Indians by the Franciscan order in 1718, but it had been abandoned in 1793. Although it derived its name from a company of soldiers from the Mexican town of Alamo de Parras who had subsequently been stationed there, it was not well suited for defense, especially by so small a force as Travis commanded.

The compound consisted of a large, rectangular plaza, adjoined on the east by a smaller plaza and the old mission chapel. The larger plaza was enclosed by a thick wall twelve feet high. Inside and adjacent to the wall were the former mission workshops and living quarters, which served the garrison as barracks, storerooms, and offices. The chapel, at the southeast corner of the mission, was filled with rubble; its roof had fallen in years before.

Green Jameson, a lawyer from Kentucky who was the Texans’ chief engineer, had worked hard to strengthen the Alamo’s weak spots. A breach in the north wall had been plugged by stones and timber. On the southeast, where there was a dangerous gap between the wall and the chapel, a palisade of logs surrounded a hastily constructed earthwork.

Now the Texans intensified their efforts. A well was dug to supplement the water from a stream flowing close outside the walls. Gun emplacements were readied in the ruins of the chapel. Davey Crockett and his handful of fellow Tennesseans, who had arrived in San Antonio only two weeks before, were assigned the critical palisade on the southeast.

As the men hauled the Alamo’s fourteen guns into position on the walls, they caught sight of Santa Anna’s flag fluttering from the bell tower of the San Fernando Cathedral on the outskirts of the city, a few hundred yards away. It was blood red, and it signified no quarter.

A short while later, the lookouts spotted another flag. This one was white. Evidently Santa Anna wanted to talk. Travis, who knew of Santa Anna’s proclaimed intent to “exterminate every White man within its (Texas’s) limits,” ordered his gunners to reply with a blast of cannon fire.

That night Jim Bowie collapsed. Bowie, whose reputation as an intrepid Indian fighter and the master of the knife which bore his name was known across the frontier, had been regarded by the volunteers from outside Texas as the garrison’s rightful commander. He had not discouraged this opinion, for he had been a leader all his life and he regarded the younger Travis as inexperienced. The friction between the two, and Bowie’s greater popularity among the men, had almost led Travis to resign.

Now, with Bowie desperately ill, command rested solely in Travis’s hands. At 28, he had already established himself as a champion of White Texans’ rights. Many of his more complacent fellow Texans had regarded him as an irresponsible firebrand until events upheld his audacity. In 1832 he had been imprisoned in the coastal town of Anahuac for challenging the authority of Colonel John Bradburn, and autocratic American in the Mexican service who was widely regarded as a race traitor by White Texans. Then in 1835 Travis returned to Anahuac with a group of comrades and seized the town, helping to spark the current secession. At the Alamo he would capitalize on his opportunity for greatness.

During the night of February 23 the Mexicans closed the ring around the Alamo, carefully staying nout of range of the defenders’ rifles after the Texas marksmen had claimed several of the less cautious. On the next day, in a dispatch which still stands as a classic expression of American heroism, Travis appealed to “the people of Texas and all Americans in the world” for aid. Recognizing the possibility of insufficient reinforcement, he ended his message, which was smuggled through the Mexican lines that night by a volunteer: “I shall never surrender or retreat. Then I call on you in the name of Liberty, of patriotism & everything dear to the American character, to come to our aid, with all dispatch . . . If this call is neglected, I am determined to sustain myself as long as possible & die like a soldier who never forgets what is due to his own honor & that of his country – Victory or Death.”

************************

I shall never surrender or retreat...Victory or Death! - Col. William Travis

************************

The first week of the siege was comparatively uneventful. The Mexicans lobbed cannon balls into the Alamo periodically without inflicting any casualties. The Texans, low on powder and shot, husbanded their ammunition. There was no reply to Travis’s appeal for help.

Then in the early morning darkness of March 1, 32 horsemen burst through the Mexican lines and galloped through the hastily opened gates of the Alamo. The Mexican sentries, caught off guard, didn’t fire a shot. The riders were Texans from Gonzalez, 70 miles east of San Antonio, led by George Kimball, a hatter. Almost all of them had families and were fully aware of the overwhelming odds facing the Alamo, but they rallied all the more enthusiastically to the relief of their countrymen. They were the only reinforcements, save one, the Alamo would receive.

One more American braved the Mexican lines to reach the Alamo. He was James Butler Bonham, a chivalrous young lawyer from a wealthy family in South Carolina and a distant cousin of Travis.

Bonham had been dispatched by Travis on February 27 to persuade the sizeable force at Goliad to march to the aid of the Alamo. The commander at Goliad was Colonel James Fannin, an indecisive and unstable officer. When it became clear to Bonham that Fannin intended to stay in Goliad, he prepared to return to the Alamo.

When Fannin implored him not to throw his life away, Bonham spat in the dust and snarled that Travis deserved to know the answer to his appeals. After stopping at Gonzalez and learning of the departure of the local men, he rode westward to glory, passing through the Mexican lines unscathed on March 3.

The drama was drawing to its conclusion. As Travis drew the line March 5, Santa Anna, buoyed by reinforcements from the south, was planning his assault on the Texans’ fortress. Shortly before daybreak the next morning, March 6, 1836, the Texans awakened to the alarms of their sentries and the rhythmic tramp of thousands of marching feet. Four columns were heading for the Alamo: two groups marching toward the north wall of the plaza, a third striking from the east, the fourth detachment moving from the south against Davey Crockett’s palisade. Over the cheers of the attacking Mexicans, the Texans could heard the regimental band blaring out the menacing strains of the “Deguello,” a march from Spain’s Moorish past, the name derived from a word for throat-cutting.

Even in the dim light of the pre-dawn the Texans could make out the gaudy braid and silver the Mexican officers sported on their uniforms. Once again the Kentucky rifle proved its mettle, as the defenders poured a devastating fire into the ranks of the advancing Mexicans. Officers and men fell by the scores, then the hundreds. Twice the Mexicans reeled back, until, reinforced by Santa Anna’s reserve, and at a terrible cost, the two northern columns reached the base of the Alamo wall. Now, deprived of the advantage the much greater range of their rifles had given them and hampered by the absence of ramparts on the thick walls, the Texans began to fall. The Mexicans scrambled up their scaling ladders, not without heavy losses, and poured over the wall.

Travis fell at the north wall, shot through the head. As the Mexicans surged into the plaza, the Texans engaged them hand-to-hand. Towering over the diminutive mestizos, they wielded tomahawks, knives, and fists to murderous effect. A gun crew on the west wall swung their piece around and riddled the Mexicans in the plaza with grapeshot before they, too, were overwhelmed.

As more and more Mexicans swarmed over the walls, the outnumbered Texans fell back into the barracks and storerooms. Only at the expense of numerous casualties were the Mexicans able to kill or dislodge the defenders.

When the Mexicans burst into one small room, they found a defiant Jim Bowie, too weak to rise from his cot, but brandishing a revolver. He shot several of his assailants before he succumbed.

Behind the palisade and in the chapel, Crockett’s and Bonham’s men still held out. The Mexicans overran them after a brief but bitter struggle. Crockett and his Tennessee volunteers lay surrounded by heaps of dead Mexicans.

Major Robert Evans was shot down, torch in hand, as he crawled to blow up the Alamo’s powder magazine. Bonham and Dickinson fell by their guns in the chapel.

For fifteen minutes after the last Texan had been killed the Mexican troops, stunned by the ferocity of the resistance, continued to bayonet and shoot the dead defenders.

Santa Anna hastened to restore order. He allowed Almeron Dickinson’s wife and infant daughter, the only White women of the Alamo, to ride west to Gonzalez, presumably to spread terror with their story. The Mexican tyrant also ceremoniously liberated Travis’s Black slave, Joe, who had been found cowering in a storeroom.

The more than 1,500 Mexican casualties were attended to. The dead were buried under the supervision of San Antonio’s Mexican mayor, Francisco Ruiz, while the wounded were ministered to by the city’s Mexican population. But the Texan dead Santa Anna sought to dishonor by denying them burial. He ordered the bodies of every one of the Alamo’s 183 defenders burned.

And so the great funeral pyre was enveloped in flames, and the fire consumed the men of the Alamo – just as countless times a thousand years before, it had consumed the fallen heroes of whom their ancestors had sung in the longhouses and the great halls of northern Europe. Like all the champions of their race, the Texans treasured honor and courage above life itself. The echoes of their heroism reverberated at San Jacinto six weeks later, when Sam Houston’s men avenged them on Santa Anna, and for a century afterward their memory gave Americans the strength to face hopeless odds resolutely.

Now, as the alien subverters stealthily work their will behind the scenes, few White Americans hearken to the lessons of the Alamo. Throughout the whole American Southwest, the mestizo descendants of Santa Anna’s horde bid to win back what he lost, as the brown flood streams unchecked across our borders.

It is time to renew the pact between the living and the dead: that they shall live on in the memory of their race, and that we, remembering, shall have their example always before us, exhorting us to carry out unflinchingly whatever the future of our race requires.

---

See also:http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6421121071497824942#editor/target=post;postID=4830167430843938899

Principles of Organization

From ATTACK! Tabloid, November 1974:

Dear Friends and Fellow Fighters for a New Order:

The proper structure of any organization depends on the goals of that organization and the conditions under which it is obliged to strive toward those goals. The long-range goals of the National Alliance are of unprecedented magnitude, and the conditions under which we must work, while not unprecedented in difficulty, are certainly formidable enough.

We want to build a whole new world, and we want to build it on a radically different ideological basis from that of the present world. In order to do so we must contend with the most determined and even fanatical opposition from the carriers of the Judeo-liberal-democratic sickness and from all those with a vested interest in the present System. Unfortunately, our opponents are able to marshal overwhelming forces against us and have almost unlimited resources at their disposal. Their chief strength, of course, is their monopoly control of the mass media. Not to be forgotten, however, are their dreadful power of the purse and their ability to deploy all the police powers of the state against us.

We are at present not only a minority but an unpopular minority. If our fellow Americans had not been hypnotized by the mass media, most of them would find themselves in agreement with the ideals for which we stand. But the Enemy has managed to raise a barrier of fear and misunderstanding between us and the public, a barrier which we must break down.

Although a national awakening is already beginning, until we have been able to completely overcome the insidious effects of the Enemy’s brainwashing of our fellow Americans – and that is a task which must be measured in years – we must count on the continued indifference or hostility of many of those we are trying to reach, and we will remain a minority, albeit a growing one.

These considerations condition the general organizational principles which guide us in the building the Alliance. Those general principles are:

1) FUNCTIONALITY. The Alliance must grow in a functional way. Its form and structure must be determined, first, by its primary task, which is the propaganda of our message of hope for a spiritual rebirth and a new life for our race; and, second, by its secondary task, which is to provide, eventually, the complete organizational framework for a new society and a new government. In other words, we are and will remain, first and foremost, a propaganda-making organization. We understand the term propaganda in its broadest sense, including both propaganda of the word and propaganda of the deed – in short, all feasible means for capturing the hearts and minds of our fellows.

But we are also the see of a new society, a new racial and national community. As time passes and we gain members, that seed will grow into a complete and functional community within the larger

community which it will one day replace, a state within the state which it will one day supersede.

2) MASS ORIENTATION. The Alliance must have a mass basis of support and of participation in its program, and it must keep is propaganda oriented toward a mass audience. It must avoid dependence for its support upon the representatives of any single special interest, and it must not restrict its appeal to any segment of the population defined in terms of occupation, income, age, geography, educational level, or present ideological orientation.

3) PERSONALITY. From the generalized mass which responds to its appeal, the Alliance sifts out those most capable of strengthening its cadres. The structure of the organization must always be such that the man or woman with greater understanding and self-discipline is able to fill a proportionately greater role in its program and make a larger contribution to its efforts than those less well endowed.

4) UNITY. The Alliance must be monolithic in purpose, in doctrine, and in strategy. Although it draws its recruits from left and right, from both radical and conservative elements of the population, and although it utilizes them in many different ways and to many different degrees, it must keep them always directed toward the common purpose.

5) FLEXIBILITY. In tactics the Alliance must remain completely flexible. Any means are permissible in achieving its ends, so long as the means do not contradict the ends.

Though our purpose remains unchanging, we may change tactics from day to day or use different tactics in different places at the same time. Our doctrine is based on the eternal and God ordained laws of Nature, but our tactics are based on the demands and the resources of the moment.

The ways in which these five principles of organization are applied to the structure and growth of the Alliance cannot be fully discussed here, but a few illustrative examples can be given. The principle of functionality lies behind the relative emphasis given to the production and public distribution of ATTACK!, as opposed to other activities which might receive this emphasis instead. An ultra-left group, such as the Symbionese Liberation Army, can kidnap someone or blow up a government building, and the news media will glamorize that group and disseminate its message to the public.

That doesn’t work for us, however. If we want the public to recognize and understand us, we must reach them through our own channels of communication. Since our aim is to replace existing institutions with our own, we must develop the basis for a smoothly functioning propaganda machine which can grow and diversify and become stronger until it if effectively competing with the controlled media for the attention of the public.

The principle of mass orientation has not played as large a role in the growth of the Alliance as it will in the future. When the economy is functioning smoothly enough so that the average citizen can maintain his accustomed standard of living, it’s hard to attract his attention to even the most urgent racial, social, or political issues. The world may be crumbling into ruin around him, but so long as he can sit in front of his TV set with his beer, he doesn’t care. Only a racially conscious minority will respond to the appeal of the Alliance under such conditions.

************************

   [T]he Alliance provides a maximum opportunity for individual initiative on the part of its members. Those who seize this opportunity are able to play a leading role in the development of the Alliance. Those who do not will never be artificially boosted into leading positions.

************************ 

But when the economy falters, the masses become more receptive to criticism of the System and more willing to consider alternatives. There has already been an increase in emphasis on economic issues in our propaganda in the last few months, and the future will see a further shift in this direction as well as the introduction of new propaganda techniques more suited for reaching a mass audience than our previous efforts.

Our mass orientation affects the choice of our means of propaganda as well as its content. Thus, we have shifted from mailing as the primary means for the dissemination of our propaganda materials, to street distributions. Mailings generally go to a minority which has already given some evidence of a particular ideological orientation, whereas street distributions reach everyone.

The principle of personality stems from a recognition that human history is a record of the thoughts, achievements, and deeds of exceptional individuals. Applied to the structuring of a society or an organization, it tells us that the most progressive structure is the one which has built into it a mechanism of natural selection for bringing those individuals of greatest ability and will into positions of leadership.

Thus, the Alliance provides a maximum opportunity for individual initiative on the part of its members. Those who seize this opportunity are able to play a leading role in the development of the Alliance. Those who do not will never be artificially boosted into leading positions. Authority within the Alliance is always earned, never bestowed as a favor.

The policy of the Alliance, which consists of members widely distributed geographically, is maintained through the leading role played by the National Office. Although individual members and Action Units often produce their own leaflets dealing with local issues and otherwise engage in propaganda on their own initiative, ATTACK! provides the ideological guidelines for everyone.

Why Revolution?

From Attack! tabloid, Issue No. 6, 1971


“If, by the instrument of governmental authority, a people is being driven to its destruction, then rebellion is not only the right but the duty of every member of that people.”


DURING TIMES OF SOCIAL DECAY and turmoil, the more responsible members of a society will nearly always be found supporting the constituted authority against the hostile or rebellious actions of disruptive elements. For the truly responsible and prudent citizen takes the long view, and he sees (in the words of the Founding Fathers) that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; that, however grievous may be the defects in any governmental policy or even in any system of government, it is nearly always preferable to tolerate those defects and to work for reform rather than to destroy the system.


Order Before Justice

Most injustices and evils on the part of a government are, after all, tolerable, but the absence of order is not. Not only is order an indispensable prerequisite for any form of society and for all human progress, but life itself cannot long continue in its absence.

Western man has been guided in his upward struggle throughout the millennia by an inherent will-to-order. It is an essential aspect of our racial soul. To many, then, it seems natural that the best racial elements of our society should be the champions of law and order, while the worst elements should be the principal proponents of disorder, revolution, and chaos.

Yet, as with most things, there are limits beyond which blind support of governmental authority ceases to be a virtue and becomes instead an evil.

The great question of our day is: How much corruption must be tolerated for the sake of order? When have things gone so far that reform of the System is no longer feasible and revolution becomes the responsible alternative? Where should the line be drawn?


Americans More Servile


History does not help us much. The conditions which, 200 years ago, led our forefathers to decide that the line had been crossed are totally unlike those of today.

We could easily justify the toleration of unfair taxes, of governmental meddling in our personal affairs and infringement of local prerogatives, if we could thereby maintain an orderly society in these vastly more dangerous times.

Although we can admire the American colonists’ fierce intolerance of tyranny, we, having become more servile and practical, would not rebel under similar circumstances. And if the issues troubling us were no more burdensome than those faced by them, the appellation “responsible conservative” would not be such an epithet of ridicule and contempt today.

Government as a Utility

In order to understand when the support of governmental authority stops being responsible and becomes merely obstinate we must examine the basic premises on which any government’s right to exist is founded.

The prevalent view of the government today, shared by both liberals and conservatives, is that it is an expensive but necessary public utility whose principal functions are to maintain law and order, mediate squabbles among the citizenry, and provide certain general services, such as national defense, mail delivery, and a bureau of weights and measures.

There is a diversity of opinion, of course, on details. Laissez-faire conservatives take the attitude that the services provided by government – and, consequently, its operating expense – should be kept at a minimal level. Welfare-oriented liberals are more inclined to demand the maximum of services and not worry about the expense.


Not A Dime’s Worth of Difference

In the most fundamental sense, however, right and left alike regard government from the same viewpoint: It is a dispenser of largesse, an oiler of the machinery of commerce, a source of favors and privileges, a traffic cop and an errand boy. Its role is to help keep society running smoothly so each citizen can “do his own thing” with a minimum of friction from others who are doing their own things.

The consequence of this libertarian concept of government is the catastrophic state of affairs which exists in the Western world today.

We plunder and poison our environment, both physical and spiritual, while the government sits on its hands.

Perversion, drugs, organized crime, and political corruption flourish, and the state can do nothing.

Massive treason occurs in our streets, just as in the highest councils of our land, and rioting aliens burn our cities, while Washington looks on helplessly.

System Is Sick

But this breakdown in operational function is only the outward manifestation of a far graver inner sickness – a sickness stemming from errors of the most fundamental sort in the very premises on which today’s government is based.

It is clear that the men who sacrificed their lives at the Alamo had a deeper motivation than a desire to preserve the police power of the state. And those who died on Iwo Jima did not do so for the sake of the farm subsidy program or an independent judiciary.

Patriotism, in fact, has very little to do with law and order, the protection of property rights, or the regulation of commerce. Contrary to libertarian claims, it has not much to do with freedom either. The preservation of freedom or of “the American way of life” may be convenient concepts around which to build war-propaganda slogans or election clichés, but the reason men are willing to die in battle has more fundamental roots.

Feeling for Own Kind

Though patriotic feeling may be developed and modified in citizens by education or indoctrination, the rudiments of patriotism are inborn. That inborn quality is simply the instinct for the preservation of one’s own kind.

The only government which can rightfully demand of its citizens loyalty unto death is a government based on this fundament. A government properly constituted and a state properly conceived serve to express the collective will of a people – that is, of a group of human beings sufficiently homogeneous in their physical and psychical makeup that the fundamental concept of “kind” has real meaning for every member of that group.

Thus, the state – and much less any government – is no end in itself, but only a means to an end. That end is the preservation and advancement of a people – of a racial community.


The Organic State

Only so far as a state is identified with the vital interests of a people is it entitled to the allegiance of that people. Such allegiance is then equivalent to loyalty to one’s own kind, and such a state is organic in that its existence stems in a natural – one could even say biological – way from a natural community.

Any racially self-conscious citizen finds himself subject to two allegiances: that binding him to his own kind and that obligating him to his government. Of the two, the first has precedence. Only in an organic state do the two coincide.

Multiracialism Is Absurd

A government which claims to represent the vital interests of a multiracial society is not only unnatural but absurd. To whom, for example, does the Bantu in South Africa or the Arab in occupied Palestine give his loyalty – to the government or to his own kind?

Neither the Afrikaners nor the Jews are so foolish as to imagine it will be to the government, despite the multi-racial baloney to which they feel obligated to give lip service. For this reason, both Jew and Afrikaner take care to keep all the strings of government in their own hands.

We in America have not been so smart – but, then, no other nation has ever been subjected to such a program of liberal brainwashing and internal subversion as we have.

A Corrupt Monstrosity

The United States government has, through slow and (until the last 20 years)nearly imperceptible change, been transformed from an organic institution embodying the will and aspirations of a free, White, and proud citizenry to a corrupt, unnatural, and degenerate monstrosity irresponsibly catering to the dissolute tastes, desires, and whims of an increasingly debased, raceless conglomerate of materialistic serfs, products of the urban jungle and the most tyrannical thought-control apparatus the world has ever known.

As the government grinds massively onward, it behaves like a Frankenstein monster out of control. It has become completely alienated from the racial elements which originally created it and gave it life.

This terrible truth manifests itself daily in a thousand ways.


Terror in the Schools

Every White student in the public school systems of America’s cities, racially integrated by decree of the Justice Department, has experienced the terror which stalks his classrooms and recreation fields, hallways and restrooms. The daily shakedowns and beatings, indignities and intimidations bring a feeling of hopelessness and despair, because the government responsible for this classroom terror will not even admit that it exists.

Every White policeman and every White serviceman belonging to a police or military unit racially integrated by decree of City Hall or the Pentagon feels the loss of spirit and efficiency which has come as a result. He is sickened and discouraged by the slackening standards in his once-proud profession, by the growing corruption and rising drug abuse on the part of those who wear his uniform.

An Alien Tide

Every working man whose union has been flooded with under skilled “minority” workers by Labor Department decree senses the loss entailed, not only to his craft or trade but to the nation. If he has any pride of workmanship he must sorrow as the old, hard-earned traditions of skill and excellence yield to the alien tide of “equality.”

Every responsible and racially conscious public-school teacher, who, year by year, sees more and more lies and distortions in the textbooks he must use – textbooks which are being continually “revised” by decree of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare – knows the shame of aiding in the planting of these lies in the minds of his young charges.

Schools Racially Destructive

This is among the most deadly of all the System’s racially destructive activities. Through its iron control over the educational process it deliberately alienates an entire generation of young Americans from their cultural and racial antecedents. It applies the corrosive compound of half-truths and lies, calculated omissions and subtle psychological tricks to destroy all bonds between the individual and his racial community.

Our schools do not truly educate; instead they produce young people who, at worse, are so filled with artificially instilled feelings of guilt and self-hatred, the consequence of never-ending propaganda about “White racism” and the oppression of minorities, that they actively and consciously collaborate with the avowed enemies of our people. At best, we get young men and women who, having been denied the knowledge of the greatness and uniqueness of their race and of their responsibility as the bearers of that greatness and uniqueness, are indifferent to any appeal to racial solidarity. They are all converts to the liberal religion of individuality – the view that the individual exists solely as an end in himself.

Every year – every day – that this deadly process continues brings us closer to that point of no return when there will be so few uncorrupted escapees from the public mind-molding institutions that no effective resistance to the System can any longer be built.


Government Genocide

The United States government does not carry on its genocidal activities blindly or accidentally or against its will. It does not act reluctantly because of pressure from the alien-controlled newspapers and broadcasting networks.

The agencies of government are integral parts of the entire, corrupt System. They work hand in hand with the propaganda media to quench any spark of racial consciousness which might threaten their rule.

Ultimately the System, in order to secure its own evil existence, seeks the destruction of every last remnant of the only race which, having created it, is also capable of destroying it.


Servants of the System

The time has come when we must wake up and realize that the policeman on the street corner and the Congressman in Washington are no longer either our guardians or our servants. They are the guardians and servants of the System – though not necessarily consciously or with malice afterthought. More often they are only timeservers; more-or-less powerless cogs in the machine themselves.

Nevertheless, willingly or unwillingly, it is the System they serve.

The governmental structure which our forefathers built up to serve and protect us has been turned against us. Its strength is no longer our security but our peril. Its weaknesses are no longer our misfortune but our opportunity.

The line has been crossed.

Among racially conscious Americans there is widespread awareness of the destructive role of the System, but an equally widespread paralysis of the will where any remedy is concerned. Part of the fault lies in the fact that with Blacks and Jewish liberals and the spoiled, hairy brats of the Establishment shouting for a revolution, everyone else is inclined to regard revolution as a dirty word. To most mature and thoughtful patriots it is an abomination.

A Trap for Conservatives

This attitude arises from a failure to understand that the “revolutionary” tactics of those elements presently rioting in the streets are only a means of further emphasizing those things we already hate worst in the System. They only want to push us even faster along the road to racial ruin.

Thus, our “responsible conservatives” (and all others) fall into the trap of saying: “No, the System is going fast enough the way you want it. We will oppose your revolutionary demands by defending the System against you.”

And they still vainly seek solutions in the realm of reform rather than revolution: Write a letter to your Congressman. Send a dollar to help awaken your fellow citizens to the dangers of communism. Vote conservative. Join a tax protest. Pray that the earth will open and swallow the Supreme Court.


Present Prosperity a Curse

When the average White working man can own a color TV set, two new cars, and a house in the suburbs, it is very difficult to think revolution. We are comfort corrupted. No matter how bad the System is, we are unwilling to sacrifice our material luxuries for the sake of securing the future of our race.

We find too difficult to accept that it is better that we suffer the worse privations, the most grinding poverty, the most tyrannical oppressions than that, wallowing in comfort, we allow the race to die.

And so we keep looking for easier ways.

But there aren’t any easy ways. Maybe there were 50 years ago, but not today.

It is no longer possible to cure the System – to bring Frankenstein’s monster to heel – by Constitutional methods.

When the electoral process ceased being a person-to-person evaluation and choice of their representatives and leaders from among themselves by a properly qualified citizenry, the governmental forms handed down to us by a free Anglo-Saxon yeomanry lost their original meaning and relevance.

Today’s political shell game, in which the entire public herd is allowed a “choice” from an array of media-generated images, makes a cynical mockery of the very concept of representative democracy.

As long as public opinion is not the spontaneous consensus of a racially and culturally homogenous populace but is the artificially created and manipulated concoction of a small clique of racially alien mind-molders, it is idle to contemplate bringing about, by System-approved means, any significant governmental change contrary to the wishes of those who control the System.

Yet, millions of optimistic patriots perennially convince themselves that they have found an honest politician who, if only they can sneak him past the professionals and get him elected, will outwit the string-pullers and return the American government to the hands of its proper owners. They drastically underestimate the cunning of their masters.

Other millions believe that public enlightenment is the answer. For example, they are under the impression that the catastrophic 1954 Supreme Court decision on racial integration of our schools was the consequence of the court being supplied with faulty information on racial differences. They seriously misjudge the motives of the beast.

A Stake Through The Heart


We do not need to reason with the monster; we need to put a bullet into its brain and hammer a stake through its heart. If that means blood and chaos and battling the alien enemy from house to house in burning cities throughout our land – then, by God, it is better that we get on with it now than later.

If “responsible” citizens have no stomach for it, then the task must fall to our radicalized youth. And it is the responsibility of the National Youth Alliance to take a leading position in coming revolutionary developments, so that young Americans can build a revolution for America and for our people, instead of serving as pawns in the alien-controlled, anti-American and anti-White revolution of the Marxists.

Why don't more respectable, successful, influential White community leaders help our noble cause, Dr. Pierce?

From 'Questions People ask' in ATTACK! tabloid, Issue No. 51, 1977:

Q. The truth of what you say in ATTACK! seems self-evident. I understand that the brainwashed public needs to be exposed to your persuasion as an antidote to the lies pumped into them by the media. But I don't understand why there are not a great many leaders of this country helping you in your efforts -- corporation presidents, statesmen, generals and admirals, celebrities, university presidents. Surely they are not all in the pay of the Enemy or taken in by his lies, are they?

A. In a sense, nearly all of them are, surprising as that may seem at first. They are in the pay of the Enemy to the extent that they have a vested interest in the maintenance of the System and the upholding of the current ideological orthodoxy. But even more so are they taken in by his lies -- to the extent that certain ideas are unthinkable to them, certain truths inadmissible.

A man who achieves high status in our society does so by learning a behavior pattern which fits well-established behavioral norms. By the time he might otherwise be ready to rebel against the alien domination and subversion of the society in which he has achieved success, he cannot do so. His behavior pattern is cast in iron, and he cannot change his ways, even if he wants to.

************************

[H]eresy has always been the enterprise of a vanishingly small minority in every age.

************************

Likewise, the very social status which he has so painstakingly sought binds him in iron chains. He must not -- he cannot -- stigmatize his gentility. He dare not espouse an idea which has been made disreputable.

It may be easier to realize the strength of these bonds if we back off a bit and look at a historical analogue or two.

A century ago the leaders of Western society damned the greatest revolutionary of their day, Charles Darwin. Among these disapproving leaders were sophisticated, learned men, including thoroughly competent scientists, such as Louis Agassiz, the great naturalist, and John Herschel, the astronomer.

They condemned Darwin because his statement of the facts of biological evolution through natural selection contradicted the Hebrew myths in in the Book of Genesis. It may seem incredible to us today that scientists could ever have believed such nonsense, but the fact is that in the 19th century a literal belief in the Old Testament was assumed, beyond doubt or question, to be held by every "respectable" member of society, just as the equalitarian-humanistic myths of the TV religion of today are accepted without question.

People who should have supported Darwin simply could not. Their minds were too tightly bound by the chains of convention. They were conditioned, much in the way of Pavlov's dogs, to reject, without thinking, anything intellectually disreputable. It requires enormous courage and strength of character to buck the herd instinct -- to accept, even privately, a truly heretical idea, i.e., heretical to the members of one's own peer group. In any age, including ours, very few people possess such courage.

************************

[T]hey did not have the moral strength to be heretics, to cut themselves adrift morally and intellectually from their peer groups and from the "respectable" society of their day.

************************

Gallileo Gallilei was not compelled to recant his scientific findings by cynics or ignoramuses, nor was Giordano Bruno condemned to the stake by a mob of rednecks or Yahoos for explicitly rejecting the anthropomorphic Jewish spookery of the Old Testament. The men who threatened Gallilieo with the rack and sent Bruno into the flames were undoubtedly intelligent and sincere men, learned men, sophisticated men -- but they did not have the moral strength to be heretics, to cut themselves adrift morally and intellectually from their peer groups and from the "respectable" society of their day.

And it is a sad fact that the more successful a person is in a society -- the higher the status he achieves -- the more tightly his soul and his mind become bound by the chains of convention, and the less able he is to break free. Today an ex-senator or a university president can scoff publicly at those who condemned Darwin. And he may even scoff privately, or among the members of his own peer group, at those who burned Bruno, whose conceptions remain heretical to the larger society today.

But he cannot violate the intellectual mores of his own peer group. That would be true heresy, which has always been the enterprise of a vanishingly small minority in every age.

And there are good and natural reasons for this overwhelmingly strong tendency toward intellectual conformity: It guarantees at least a modicum of social stability. But it is unfortunate that it is as often a barrier to progress as it is to social regression.