THE ROBERT W. WHITAKER ARCHIVE

The world record for the hundred yard dash the last time I looked was 9.3 seconds.

Have you ever watched an "international" sprint competition? You see nine racers competing, all of them black. The "Swedish" entry is black. The "German" entry is black.

They're ALL black and nobody expects anything different. But the Genome Project assures us that under the skin we are all "modern humans."

But if skin color makes no difference, this presents an obvious problem.

There is another race, one which makes infinitely more difference to the future of humanity than a new sprint record.

Call it the Standard of Living competition. In this lineup you have white majority countries and brown countries.

Once again, there is no competition. It is entirely a matter of color. In sprints non-blacks are non-starters. Every country with black skin or mulatto skin is a non-starter.

This lesson of the sprints is so obvious no one notices it.

You see, in order for it to be noticed, someone has to POINT IT OUT.

And if the only person pointing it out is a tired old man called Bob, truth is being shortchanged.

It is true that INDIVIDUAL blacks, Asians, Indians and Chinese and Japanese do very, very well IN A WHITE SOCIETY.

Everybody does better in a white society.

Libertarians and liberals want all the presently white majority countries to mix into a uniformly brown group. My problem is that everywhere that has happened, people are stagnant and poor. Liberals and libertarians say that that will not happen if white majority countries all mix into a uniform brown this time.

They prove it by arresting or ruining anyone who disagrees.

Brown people do very well in a society built by whites. Everybody does better in a society built by whites.

THIS IS USED AS AN ARGUMENT AGAINST THE EXISTENCE OF WHITE SOCIETIES!

People insist that if non-whites do well in a white society, a society made up of brown people will lead the world just as well as a white society does. So, they say, whites need to disappear into a melting pot.

And with our present mode of thought, no one but me would notice that this is total self-contradiction. That scares me.

Please never forget that the issue is the end of the white race. If we followed the neoconservative program and cut immigration and dedicated ourselves to assimilating with the nonwhites we have here now, there would be no white race in America. We already have PLENTY of nonwhites here to become the colored society the conservatives, liberals, respectable conservatives, and neoconservatives dream of.

It is no accident that the present immigration law was passed in 1965, right after the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It is part and parcel of the same package. The same conservatives who say the 1965 act was a disaster praise the 1964 Civil Rights Act to the skies.

That is WHY they call themselves NEOconservaties. They say that everything liberals did on race in the 1960s was perfect in the 1960s. Those of us who said the whole program was aimed at an end to the white race were right. They will lead the lynch mob against anyone who criticizes any of that program.

Decolonization, they insist, was wonderful. They insist that all those little poverty-stricken dictatorships in the third world were a wonderful product of Holy Progress.

Now that those wonderful colored sovereign states are beginning to get hold of atomic weapons, they say the whole thing is just getting out of hand. They want white countries to have colonial authority over third world weapons, but how they treat their own people is THEIR business.

That is the ONLY difference between an openly colonial attitude and a neoconservative attitude.

Neoconservative means that everything they did to get us into this condition was GOOD, but the CONSEQUENCES we predicted back then are a pure accident of history.

The point is that respectable conservatives and neoconservatives protect liberals from admitting that their whole world view after WWII was Evil, it was WRONG from the word Go.

As long as all we bitch about is the LATEST MANIFESTATIONS of that attitude, we are AGREEING with them.

It is easy to join in the hue and cry against the latest outrages. It is hard work to tie those latest manifestations to the fundamental WRONGNESS our society has accepted.

THAT is our job. We must turn our people AROUND. We must guide the thought to basics, to RACIAL issues.

Their position had been that the Declaration and not the Constitution is the basis of America, all the way back to Lincoln.

We must fight the fight on the BASICS.

The white race has already BEEN defined: It is the race that makes up the countries all the anti-whites say the third a world should be allowed to pour into.

In the REAL world today's policy is "Africa for the Africans, Asia for the Asians, White countries for everybody."

Out in the real world, NOBODY demands that non-white countries import ANY immigrants. Out here in the real world, ONLY Eastern European countries get asked, "Are you ready for immigration YET?"

The question is so obvious no one even WHY Eastern European leaders are constantly asked this. In real world discourse it is routine: They are WHITE and therefore the next step is third world immigration.

Japan's population fall is the worst on earth, and no one is DEMANDING, I repeat, DEMANDING that they open their high-income borders.

But to ask this of Eastern Europe is so routine you haven't even NOTICED it.

The real evils of any age are so obvious they are not mentioned and are therefore not thought about.

We all know that Tiger Woods would have nothing to do with a girl who looked like the daughter he and his beautiful Swedish bride will produce. We all know that OJ would have nothing to do with a girl who looked like the daughter he and his blond wife produced.

But one is REQUIRED not to notice this.

Once you go there, for ANY reason, you are in a whole new category.

Decency IS prejudice.

Citizenship IS prejudice.

All loyalty, every "family value," IS prejudice.

An unprejudiced person is a psychopath.

A society that truly has zero tolerance for "racism" ( the town motto of Waterton, Mass) or any other prejudice gets sicker and sicker in every way.

Anyone who can TRULY talk himself out of a normal prejudice once can NEVER be trusted.

And to survive, one must discrimate.

When it comes to negotiating for whites there is a reality:

Which, again, is so obvious that no one mentions it.

Everybody WANTS to be white.

That is why libertarians get short shrift. They argue that whites should have the same right to all-white communities that other races do their own communities. This never sells but that never stops them.

This nice-sounding argument is dismissed for a reason everyone knows but no one mentions. It is assumed that, if whites are allowed to separate, there wouldn't be any whites who would choose to live outside their own communities.

Exactly that happened when busing was at its peak. There were not enough whites left after white flight to racially balance schools. In one famous faux pas, a black government official said that, "White children are a precious resource which must be distributed carefully."

I don't think I need to tell you about the storm that THAT piece of bare reality caused. It was the whole basis of busing, but it was also NEVER to be mentioned.

Bill O'Reilly with his education degree states the whole basis of the respectable position:

"There can be no all-white ANYTHING in America." This assumes that all non-whites want to be white, and every non-white negotiator goes in with that assumption.

There can be no white escapees AND WE ALL KNOW WHY.

Simmons has been hammering on the importance of the term anti-white and it is time for me to chime in. I haven't been on Stormfront for years, but I fought and I fought to get them to stop using terms like "anti" for the anti-whites.

It would be a shame if people with all our years of experience with the effectiveness of "racist" were to underestimate the importance of a basic attack word. "Racist" has been the greatest single weapon in the enemy's arsenal. It is their attack word.

The attack word is the one that draws a reaction. For them it is racist. For us the attack word is anti-white. It sums up our reaction to their basic genocidal program. It is TRUE.

"Racism" is also TRUE. When the Founders declared that America was entirely about "We the People" they followed it with a 1793 Act declaring that the "people" they referred to was WHITE.

America was considered simply racial movement of the white race, the same one which, in wave after waved, brought Aryan groups, Iberians, Celts, Germans and Slavs across Europe westward into Europe. It brought the Dorian Greeks then the Ionian Greeks. It brought the Latins to Italy and then the Germanic Lombards.

This was well known, and it was a conundrum when Lincoln declared that America was a Proposition, not a people. The Constitution says it is a people. The legislation passed four years after the Constitution was adopted said it was a people.

A WHITE people.

So those who say "racist" are right. America was founded on racism, as they define it. That is what Lincoln-worshipping conservatives cannot face. That is why the word "racist" makes them change their diapers, because if America is NOT racist, it is just a bunch of words.

Conservatism cannot face true history, because it is as much a bunch of words, words twisting reality, as the left is.

Having explained why "racist" is effective because it is true.

"Anti-white" hits home on both liberals and respectable conservatives because it is true. Liberals are perfectly aware that what they say about whites, if said about any other race or any religion, would be genocidal hatred.

Even the radicals regret the statement, "The white race is the cancer of humanity." It was too blatant, and too true of their mindset.

Which is why anti-white is so effective. That one word changes the whole debate.

That one word sums up the whole debate.