By Hunter Wallace | 5 Comments |
Print
The R.E.A.L. Tragedy
A response to Jeffrey Imm and R.E.A.L.
Growing up in the 1990s, I found myself pondering all sorts of mysteries as a teenager: why did my black classmates consistently receive lower test scores; why were black students always in the lower track courses; why did people on television claim that blacks were as smart as Whites; why did blacks act in such a peculiar way; why were the smart White kids herded into the same schools with black thugs and drug dealers. I didn’t get it. Something didn’t feel right.
The inclusion of blacks at my school always bothered me. It struck me as an obstacle to my education. Blacks often assaulted the White kids in the school cafeteria. They sold drugs in school. They disrupted the classroom. They didn’t show any interest in their studies. Their sordid underclass culture rubbed off on the poorer Whites. My teachers were constantly forced to waste their time catering to the lowest common denominator. It was one long farce from kindergarten to graduation.
When I arrived at college, I was catapulted into a whole different world. Suddenly, there were lots of bright people around me with similar interests. A magic filter whisked away all the troublesome blacks who took up space in high school. In their place, I had an enormous college library to mine with thousands of books that interested me. I had a slew of courses that I could take to satisfy my intellectual curiosity. There was no comparison between my new segregated environment and my old integrated one.
I plunged in head first. When I emerged five years later, I was a different person. I had come to realize that my generation was the subject of a cruel liberal experiment in social engineering. In the name of “equality,” a small group of federal judges and ideologues had overthrown Alabama’s segregated school system and forced raw negroes into the White schools. This was done solely to uplift the negro, not to improve the White schools. Integration was based on the flawed premise that segregated schools were the cause of black academic underperformance.
Fifty years later, the segregationists have yet to be vindicated. The racial gap in average test scores failed to disappear in the integrated schools. It has stubbornly persisted into the Obama presidency. The traditional social problems of the black underclass (illegitimacy, vulgarity, drug abuse, violence, indolence, teen pregnancy) were imported into the White schools where they became a common problem. America’s public schools once inspired envy throughout the Western world. Thanks to our growing black and mestizo population, they now rank near the bottom.
The segregationists were right about other things. Theodore Bilbo had predicted that the end of segregation would unleash a tidal wave of black-on-white violent crime. Even Bilbo though couldn’t imagine that the day would come when negroes would rape over 35,000 white women per year in the United States. This was unknown in the Jim Crow South. Interracial crime is a one way street. Whites are overwhelmingly the victims of murders, thefts, rapes, and assaults by negroes, not the other way around. Even when blacks murder, rape, and steal from other blacks, White taxpayers incur the costs of their incarceration. This is another unsavory aspect of Martin Luther King’s so-called “dream” that is deliberately ignored in the mainstream.
Why do Whites accept inferior schools? Why do they endure unbearable levels of interracial violent crime? Why do they put up with racial discrimination in the form of affirmative action? Why do Whites accept an immigration policy which displaces them from their neighborhoods and reduces their political power? Why do Whites accept the redistribution of their wealth to non-Whites?
Let’s travel further in this vein: Why do Whites accept the degeneration of their culture? Why do Whites accept the spread of poverty, disease, filth, and ignorance in their midst? Why do Whites accept economic underdevelopment? Why do Whites accept the surrender of their culture and identity to placate hostile minorities? Why do Whites think their displacement in their native lands is a good thing? Why do Whites confuse decline with progress?
From a perspective of self interest, White racial suicide doesn’t make any sense. It becomes explicable though in the light of ideology and altruism. Our enemies have twisted Christianity and republicanism to justify our demise as a people. The intellectual fraud they have perpetrated doesn’t stand up to close historical scrutiny. The real impulse to annihilate Whites comes from outside both of these traditions.
Two centuries ago, Whites didn’t have these debates. Republicanism and Christianity flourished alongside a vigorous racial nationalism. Slavery was a contentious issue, but Whiteness itself wasn’t attacked by even the most radical egalitarians. No one believed that “liberty” and “equality” mandated or required the demographic submersion of America’s White majority. If a Christian minister or priest had invoked “love” to justify the racial displacement of his flock, they would have laughed him out of church. They probably would have tarred and feathered him to boot.
The attack on Whiteness began in the twentieth century. It came from three primary sources: Jewish academics, black intellectuals, and Marxists. More often that not, blacks and Jews mingled in the same radical fringe. It was an extremely secular milieu. Collectively, they dreamed of overthrowing the bourgeoisie republican order and replacing it with a classless Marxist utopia in which all racial and social distinctions would be abolished.
The Soviet Union was the first European nation to permanently incorporate this revolutionary ideal into law. In the 1920s, the USSR became a mecca for radical black intellectuals alienated from America. In the United States, the Communist Party USA was the only political party that fully championed the colorblind ideal that gradually triumphed after the Second World War. It was instructed to unfurl the banner of racial equality by the Comintern. Within the CPUSA, the Moscow party line was controversial, as it tended to alienate White working class voters.
This is a rich story that no one has completely told. The term “racism” made its debut on the Marxist fringe in the 1920s, entered American public discourse in the 1930s, and penetrated the mainstream in the 1940s. The Civil Rights Movement had close ties to communism in its earliest years. The U.S. dismantled Jim Crow largely because of the appeal of communism in the Third World. The ruling class neutralized the racial threat of Soviet communism (the possibility of a black fifth column) by mainstreaming the Soviet racial ideal here in America.
The spearhead of anti-racism hasn’t changed in our own times. It is still composed of Jewish academics, black intellectuals, and Marxists. The common thread uniting them is communism, atheism, and hatred of Whites. They have since moved on to creating a new radical discourse about “white privilege” and new forms of subversion like “critical race theory.” These ideals are then smuggled into the mainstream through left-wing front groups as the newest form of Christianity and republicanism.
This is where Comrade Jeffrey enters the picture. His apparent role is to put words into the mouth of Jesus Christ or Thomas Jefferson that were never spoken. The true progenitors of his ideal can trace their footsteps back to Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin. He doesn’t want you to find that out though.
Occidental Dissent, February 3, 2010


<>
I believe that through various devices, white Americans were silenced, one by one, through insult, loss of jobs, loss of community standing, and smearing. It is less violent than being taken from your house at 5 AM and shot, but it does force a kind of silencing that rewards the large guns of our adversaries, and few have thought through this problem to develop solutions.
At Resisting Defamation, we believe that every silencing technique can be turned aside with hard work, thus allowing white authenticity to emerge. Unfortunately, the first thought that comes to one’s mind is one that triggers the smears and the silencing, so one is well advised to develop ways of speaking out that sidestep the adversary’s gun placements and allows lateral attackback.
Imm comes across as so pathetic that it’s hard to take him seriously. I can do little more than pity a man who goes around saying “choose love, not hate.” Cause those are our choices!
The religious nuts bringing Haitian kids back to the USA are doing some of the most immoral acts imaginable, yet they merrily go about their business — even flouting laws in the process — in a self-satisfied, socially-induced stupor of self-righteousness. Haitians had a revolution specifically to kill and drive out the white French colonists years ago. Then they fell into constant strife, famine, and unrest like so many other African countries without white influence and infrastructure. They are the racial “Lord of the Flies” of the world now. It is amazing that they expect one ounce of help from us. They never helped us with Hurricane Katrina or any of our earthquakes. They will not even lift a finger to help themselves!
If a religious person helps a criminal be criminal, it is called corruption. If a priest deliberately does crime himself, it is corruption as well. Bringing blacks to the USA and spreading the immorality and unrest they sow is hardly moral. Destroying charity and morality genetically and culturally is a crime too.
Perhaps the young blacks they bring in will be the final straw in putting us under the point where black genes will cause a growing corruption and downward spiral in the USA — totally destroying white genes and culture in a sort of genetic snowball effect. These religious nuts could be responsible for eventually destroying the world, or even bringing hell on Earth in a few hundred or a few thousand years. They totally ignore the fact that religion comes from inside people too, that Haitians made voodoo “santeria” out of western christianity. Culture comes from deep inside people. Forcing us to mix with other races destroys the future, and like every other act which destroys the future of society and truth and charity, it is IMMORAL. Bad information and outright lies have made people think that the most immoral of acts, the most destructive of acts in a very real long-term sense, are somehow moral.
Religion itself might actually have started out as a culture-protecting, must-follow pattern for protecting our genetic destiny and the society which breeds it. A pattern seen “through a glass darkly” before genetic science of course — like alchemy before chemistry. In this sense, these misguided people forcing us together and importing other races are working against the very foundation and ultimate goals of religion and morality itself. Instead of bringing truth and charity, soberness and reason, they bring the seeds of hell on Earth.
When I first saw the article about this guy Imm, one of my first thoughts was “I wonder what his REAL name is”. “Imm appears to be a shortened version of a surname. Would not surprise me if it originally was a “berg”, “stein”, or “stone”. Jews are notorious for changing their last names, to conceal their ethnicity.
Good article for which, no doubt, there will be much response. As for Jeffrey Imm, IMO, you give him much too much space between your ears. You crank out more exposure for this nutter than he is capable of doing himself. Give him the null categorization that he is and deserves.