All Episodes
Previous Next
July 20, 2018 - Radio Renaissance - Jared Taylor
59:35
Out with the Whites
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to another edition of Radio Renaissance.
As usual, it's been a fact-filled week, an event-filled week.
There is never, ever a dull week for those who are interested in the demographic future of the United States and of Europe and what is in store for our people.
As usual, in the studio with me is our indefatigable and always insightful guest, Paul Kersey.
And I'd like to start, once again, with the question of democratic politics.
The Democratic Party is changing in rapid ways, and I hope that many of the white people who vote for the Democrats and those who aspire to some sort of political office with the support of the Democratic Party are paying very close attention.
Because the latest victim of this shift, not only to the left, which is the way the media are generally characterizing it, but the shift towards the non-whites.
The latest victim of this is Dianne Feinstein.
And what happened last week is that the California Democratic Party leaders endorsed, instead of the incumbent Dianne Feinstein, a state lawmaker named Kevin de Leon.
And as you can tell from his last name, this guy is part of the rising tide of color.
And this is referred to as a stinging rebuke to Senator Dianne Feinstein.
Now, she's running for her fifth full term in the Senate.
30 years?
Boy, I mean, it's time for her to clear out anyway.
But the fact is, this vote by 330 members of the state party's executive board, which is in a position to give endorsements, DeLeon, the new guy, the new guy on the block, got 65% of the vote and Feinstein received 7%.
Not only did she get just 7%, but 28% of those 330 members voted for no endorsement.
So they didn't want to take a side basically.
They wanted to Carefully bow out from the old guard, and like you pointed out, the rising tide of color, we've seen it submerge the old-style politics in New York, as we've talked about so much on this podcast recently, and now in a state as California goes, so goes the nation.
I believe it's quite obvious that What was that one website?
Imagine 2040?
I think it's time we start imagining 2018.
Because that's the time where they're popping the champagne bottles and thinking, it's alright, let's let the... Like we talked about before this podcast started, Mr. Taylor.
It's time to let the cat out of the bag.
No white male or white female need apply for a position to be our leader.
This transformation has been so remarkably rapid.
And as I say, I hope white people are paying attention.
And they must be paying attention.
Apparently though, this may not make a difference.
The endorsement of the state party's executive board may not make a difference in the polls because Dianne Feinstein has $7 million in campaign cash socked away and at that time, this was in May when the figures are from, she had 10 times more than Kevin DeLeon had.
Of course, the voters are changing.
Money may not make the difference.
But it's worth pointing out that at the time of the primary, and as you know, California has this weird jungle primary in which you can enter the primary, you can be from any party, but just the top two finishers then slug it out in the general election.
And Dianne Feinstein finished first in a large field.
I can't remember how many there were.
20 some odd people with 44% of the vote.
And DeLeon finished far behind with 12% but he was the second place finisher.
44 to 12.
But it'll be very interesting what Dianne Feinstein gets for her 7 million dollars when she starts splashing it out for television heads.
One aspect of this, of course, is that DeLeon is a youngster.
He's only 51 years old.
You know who she is?
She's a spry 85 years old.
this rising tide of color and Dianne Feinstein, you know who she is?
85, boy.
She's a spry 85 years old.
85, boy. In any case, it's interesting to me the way the press is reporting this,
that policy insiders and the politically attentive Democrats see that these sort of
Democrat versus Democrat fights like we had in New York, like we have in California,
are evidence of, as they put it, a deepening chasm between the party's moderates and its
progressives.
Well, that's one way to look at it.
But the way we can't help but look at it is that it is a deepening chasm between the party's old guard of white people and the rising tide of young non-whites.
My memory is deceiving me at the moment.
A senator is there for six years, correct?
So she was going for her fifth full term.
Right.
So she was elected back in what?
1990... 1992 was when she was first in office.
Sounds right, yes.
And she was mayor of San Francisco before that.
She's been an old war horse in the Democratic Party for a long time, and she has staked her name, her reputation, on all kinds of liberal causes, but not liberal enough, not progressive enough for this gang.
Some people are comparing it between the Bernie Sanders and the Hillary Clinton wing of the Democratic Party.
That's one aspect, but I think the racial aspect is equally important.
Of course, De Leon is part of this Get Rid of ICE faction within the Democrats.
And he's apparently a pretty clever guy, or at least somebody pretty clever works for him.
Apparently, last Friday, he had an Abolish ICE cream social.
I think that's pretty funny.
It's clever in a way when you think that for the past 24 years, Dianne Feinstein has dedicated her entire life, her entire political life, to bringing about the moment where California now is a one-party state.
Republicans have no chance of winning a Senate.
In fact, in a lot of counties and a lot of districts, that were once safely Republican in 2018, there's a great chance that those could go and those could flip because of the demographic changes.
But there's not going to be one statue.
Erected for Dianne Feinstein's role in the demographic transformation of California.
If there are any streets or any schools named after her, within 10 years, those will be changed because she didn't get out of the way fast enough.
Exactly.
That will be their view.
They will not be grateful.
They said, you guys hung on for too long.
Look, you were 85.
You were in the Senate for five terms.
Why didn't you clear out sooner and let us take over?
But, yep, big changes coming on, big changes, and I hope people are noticing.
And another example of the kind of change that I think is very significant in the Democratic Party is the Democratic Minnesota Republican Keith Ellison.
He's famous, of course, for I believe he's the first to have taken the oath of office on a Koran rather than the Bible.
He's the deputy chair of the Democratic National Committee.
And he takes the view that America's borders create, in his view, an injustice by keeping Mexican workers from traveling to the United States to look for higher paying jobs.
Now, he's another one of these guys who believes that the prosperity of the United States is, as he puts it, based on the want that is experienced in other parts of the world.
We are rich only because they are poor, not because we are creative or productive.
And I think another point he makes is, we just have to say that the 12 million undocumented people in the United States are here because somebody wants them to be here.
But then he goes on to say the people who want them to be here just want them to be in an illegal status so they can exploit them, etc, etc.
Basically saying that anybody who wants should be able to come.
You know, for the record, the Radio Renaissance podcast, I believe that the number of illegal immigrants, I don't speak for Jared here, but I think the number is closer to 30 million.
So, Mr. Allison, of course, is grossly underappreciating the level of Infiltration that's already happened in the United States of America courtesy of illegal immigrants and what they've done to truly bastardize and destroy upward mobility and wealth creation for working-class Americans.
You know, Mr. Ellison's comments, we can talk about treason all we want to, you know, you and I were joking earlier this week about The left saying that what Donald Trump just did in Russia is treasonous.
And then you think of what their leaders, their deputy chair of the Democratic National Committee, is basically arguing that borders shouldn't exist.
So Donald Trump wants peace with the greatest nuclear power in the world.
The second greatest.
I've actually read that they have more operative nukes than we do.
I don't know if that's neither here nor now, but let's just put it this way.
It's a great thing that Russia and the United States are now at peace.
Yes, I agree.
The fact is, Keith Ellison, he has worn t-shirts that call explicitly for open borders.
Yes, he has!
So he's not hiding his light under a bushel.
No, not only is he a guy who has worn t-shirts for open borders, this happened, regrettably, when you had been removed from Twitter, but he put out a tweet reading a book praising Antifa.
So here's a guy who is publicly taking a picture of himself reading a book that praises the tactics of shaming and even violent acts against conservatives because, hey, Axiomatically, a conservative is nothing more than a Nazi or a racist in the eyes of the left.
Exactly.
And I think it's significant to point out that this fellow, Keith Ellison, who is black, we hadn't pointed that out, but I believe our listeners probably know that, He is the deputy head of the Democratic National Committee.
The head is Tom Perez.
Yet again, not an Irishman, not an Italian, not a German, no Tom Perez.
And I think about all you need to know about Tom Perez, there's a lot to be known about him, but that he was assistant attorney general for civil rights under Obama, under Eric Holder.
So clearly he's a man who has got a racial consciousness and wishes to push the interests of his people forward.
So here we have the Democratic National Committee.
The number one guy is Tom Perez, a militant Hispanic.
The number two guy is Keith Ellison, a militant black.
I think that blacks like him are, of course, betraying other blacks.
If he really wants to open borders, is that good for black people?
I think it'd be very, very, very hard to argue that it's good for black people unless he still believes in this hippie-happy nonsense about how all the non-whites are going to hold hands and finally put whitey in his place.
You know, it's funny.
I never really care if something's good for black people.
The way I look at illegal immigration, hey, this is not good for white people.
But what is good for white people is the Democratic Party removing the mask and showing us Well before whites are a minority across the country, hey, guess what?
This is what you can expect your children and your grandchildren are going to face for the rest of their life.
Yes, yes.
I think this is extremely significant.
We really need to get one of our hard-hitting writers to work on a big piece about what is going on in the Democratic Party, what that means for us, and whether or not anybody's paying attention.
Well I'd actually, I'm going to do a public challenge because I know Gregory Hood will hear about what goes on this podcast.
I think Hood could put together not just an amazing initial piece, but I think there's actually a book in how quickly the Democratic Party in the age of Trump has shifted to completely embrace the idea of open borders, quickly embrace and accept I agree.
anti-white positions and more importantly this has happened so quickly
and it's happened in a lot of ways I would argue that it is a response to
Trump and what they project what they project Trump to represent when in fact
it's not what he represents. No no no over and over and over again he is
accused of basically trying to do ethnic cleansing in the United States make
America white again over and over.
He will take some innocuous policy just trying to crack down on illegal immigration, and that is racism.
We see this over and over.
This is white supremacy.
But, you know, there were a couple of articles that recently showed up in the Washington Post that make me wonder.
Maybe some of these white Democrats are paying attention.
And the reason I think this is that recently, well, about five months ago, the Washington Post published an article by a fellow named Michael Anton, he's a lecturer at Hillsdale College, And the title of that article was, Why do we need more people in this country anyway?
Now, if that's not a blow to the idea of immigration forever, I don't know what is.
Now, I must say, I have been making this argument for a long time.
The way I used to say it on the radio 20 years ago is I would be talking about immigration in general and why we don't need any more people.
I said, when's the last time you were driving down the road and you said to yourself, gee, there's not enough traffic.
I want to be in a jam.
And when's the last time you were riding down the countryside through rolling green hills and you said, this is so ugly.
I wish there were strip malls here.
What are these trees doing here?
Yes, yes.
These ugly, horrible trees.
Yes.
Just spewing out oxygen.
Horrible.
Why do we need more people?
And the point I used to make is that, do you know what the population of the United States was in 1945?
You probably have some idea.
It was about 110 million?
About 125 million.
Okay.
We're now 315.
We got more than twice the number of Americans.
I don't think in 1945 people walking around saying, oh my god our poor country is so underpopulated.
It's why I hate watching movies.
I'll tell you a movie that I think you would really enjoy.
Michael Keaton came out in a biopic called The Founder about the founding of McDonald's and it's so sad to watch that because he starts out as a milkshake maker machine salesman and he's going from small town to small town and they did a great job.
This was made last year and then he then he travels out to California to San Bernardino from Missouri where he's selling to meet the McDonald brothers because he's gonna they wanted to buy I don't know six or seven of his milkshake makers and it it does such a fabulous job of showing what America once was and it's it's it's a sparsely populated like you just said a sparsely populated nation where the suburbs weren't 60 miles outside of all the major cities the suburbs were 10 miles outside Chicago or 10 miles outside of St.
Louis.
San Bernardino was a dusty Dusty Town, as opposed to a place where a horrific Islamic terror attack happened in 2015.
There wasn't one Muslim in California, probably, at the time.
Well, there were a few.
But, you know, it's not like it is now.
But it's a movie that I would challenge.
Again, I'll put another challenge out.
It's a movie I think Hood would actually really enjoy watching because it's a sad film.
Where you think about what has, like you just said, the transformation of America from a rural, sparsely populated nation into one where, how many hours do white Americans spend commuting to and from their jobs, away from their families?
Stuck in traffic, just burning up gasoline, going nowhere.
Yes, this jam-packed, where is there a single city in the United States where the traffic has gotten better?
No.
We're just jamming in.
There are all sorts of studies on the fact that urban sprawl means we have, whenever it rains, the water's got no place to go.
It takes away topsoil with it when it rushes off of all these acres and acres of concrete.
I just don't understand why we are fixated on this idea.
We're the true conservationists.
We are.
Conservation and conservative have similar roots.
And what better object of our conservative and conserving desire than our planet and our people?
I brought up this Michael Anton piece about why do we need more people, only because just last week the Washington Post published yet another piece, the title of which is Citizenship Shouldn't Be a Birthright.
Now, this is astonishing for the Washington Post, first of all, to say, even to let anybody express the view, we don't need more people.
And now to say, there should be no birthright citizenship.
But just because you're born here, it shouldn't make you a citizenship.
And Anton goes on to make a point that I think is extremely relevant and entirely correct.
And I'm quoting from the article, it says, The entire case for birthright citizenship is based on a deliberate misreading of the 14th amendment.
That's of course the amendment that was passed after the 13th amendment, which abolished slavery, which was establishing the fact that the freed slaves, the freedmen blacks, were nevertheless citizens of the United States.
And that was, at that time, that was necessary insofar as there were still a lot of states' rights.
A state could have said, well, okay, you may be free, but you're not a citizen of the state of South Carolina.
Yeah.
And that was the thinking behind that.
The idea that somehow this means, did you know that according to real U.S.
law, you could be in a plane traveling through American airspace, and if you gave birth on that plane, a woman gives birth on the plane over American airspace, you could claim U.S.
citizenship.
That's all it takes.
And you could be flying over, not even have a visa.
Anyway, this stuff is insane, and it is remarkable that the Washington Post is making this point.
And this gets back to the way I introduced this idea about the Washington Post article.
Maybe there are people paying attention to what's happening in the Democratic Party, but the other aspect of it is, I think, Some of these big newspapers, they're seeing their declining circulation.
They're seeing the proliferation of real, thoughtful, thought-provoking points of view that are not reflected on their pages.
And they must be saying to themselves, why are we declining?
Maybe we have to spread our ideology, I mean, spread our spectrum a little wider.
I mean, the editorial content of the Washington Post is ridiculed on this podcast a lot and on a lot of wonderful other websites that point out that, hey, what's this?
Here's this Jeff Bezos guy.
Why is he using this as his basically playground to push for content that won't question the crazy nature of the beast that he's built up with Amazon?
You know, you have to wonder.
I've always wondered.
What type of conversations does Bezos and a guy like the SpaceX... Why is his name escaping me right now?
SpaceX, Tesla... Oh, Elon Musk.
Elon Musk.
These guys both have...
Space companies.
They both have rocket companies.
Blue Ocean for Bezos.
For Musk, it's SpaceX.
They meet a lot.
Obviously, all these guys meet a lot.
What type of conversations are they actually having?
What are they talking about?
We know Musk understands about demographics.
He's talked about demographics a lot.
I just got done reading a fascinating book and Bezos is an unbelievably interesting guy.
He spent most of his childhood on his grandfather's farm down in Texas, on his ranch, and he did hard labor, hard work.
And that's where he, back in the early 2000s, when Amazon went public and he started to get a lot of money, that's where he went and surreptitiously started buying up a lot of land to be the launch pad and to be where he could do testing for the rockets.
Bezos is a guy to keep your eye on, you know?
A lot of these guys... Are you suggesting that he may be capable of changing his mind?
I think that people, when Bezos The big moment in his life that this book brings up was when he was six, seven, when the moon landing happened.
And the book makes the big case, he keeps saying, why did we not go back?
Why did we not go back?
Why did we have this great moment in 69, but what happened?
This is something that the human race can get behind.
Obviously, we know that that's not the case.
And this is one of the things that motivates Musk.
Because again, these guys, Bezos just became the richest man in modern history.
When Amazon stock hit $1,800 a share.
He's worth $150 billion.
Now here's a guy who obviously to have that type of foresight to build a company in this drive.
Amazon Prime Day just happened.
I think they sold 100 million parcels.
They're gonna ship that many.
I mean it's stunning.
But a guy like that you have to wonder what type of vision do they have?
Obviously he's attained stuff and He's done marvelous things for the economy, but I have, you know, obviously at some point he might knock your books off of Amazon.
That would be terrible, but again, he's doing things behind the scenes, and you have to wonder at what point the Washington Post, he could shift the debate.
I guess the point I'm making a long-winded way is this.
A guy like Bezos owning the Washington Post, He could shift one day.
He could walk into the editorial board meeting and say, this isn't working anymore.
We're going to hire a guy like, I'll just throw his name out, Michael Anton to come in and we're going to let him run a weekly column, a daily column online.
He could change editorial content and shift the debate so quickly.
Well, of course, when he bought the post, there were all sorts of agreements about how he was not going to interfere with editorial content.
Of course, when you're the owner, you can change the rules.
It would be fascinating to see just how farsighted he really is, if he does want to get back on the moon, if he does want to go to Mars.
At some level, he must realize that we don't get to those places by taking these ghetto blacks, especially ghetto black women, and pretending that we can turn them into STEM superstars who become astrophysicists and rocketry engineers who are going to take us to Mars.
No offense to Hollywood, it wasn't black hidden figures that got us to the moon with the slide rule.
No.
And I think Jeff Bezos, and we know Elon Musk, they understand this.
It's why Elon Musk won't even agree to any of the EEOC demands, and he pays the fines.
So, I know we got sidetracked, I just want to point out that this goes back to the conversation we had a couple weeks ago, when we saw that crazy article on the cover of the USA Today, that started, that kickstarted that whole immigration children debate.
And it was like, what is this?
If you just had, I mean, they have to win, our enemies have to win every day.
Every day they have to win.
This fake outrage about this Trump-Putin treason summit when there are 30 million illegal aliens in the country.
How dare you lecture us on Donald Trump wanting to have peace with Russia when the Democratic Party's platform is abolishing ICE.
Yes.
And getting rid of borders.
Don't you dare talk to us about treason.
Treason to who?
Treason to who?
Treason to what?
Those are dangerous questions, Mr. Kersey.
Very dangerous questions.
And as you say, you talk about abolishing borders and this notion of getting rid of ICE and this idea that somehow anybody who can sneak into the country deserves to be here.
This was really on display in what I thought was a really almost poignant way.
In Los Angeles, in the Boyle Heights neighborhood.
Boyle Heights used to be a Jewish neighborhood.
Now it's predominantly Latino, as the press delicately puts it.
And there's a fellow who wanted to start up a cafe and lounge.
His name is Asher Shalom.
He's an immigrant from Israel.
And he had his opening day, his opening gala was just this week for his cafe.
And there were people who demonstrated against him.
There were some 30 protesters that showed up on his opening day of his, of the Asher Cafe and Lounge, shouting such things as, these racists have got to go.
Get the F out.
This is a patrons coming out of this place or going into this place.
And now, why?
Why on earth are they doing this?
It's because Asher Shalom, he is an immigrant, but he was a legal immigrant.
He's been in the United States for 30 years.
And he supports Donald Trump.
He supports the idea that you should come to the United States legally rather than illegally.
And this is enough.
This is enough to set these people to motivate 30 people to stand outside of his place on the opening day, the opening gala, and tell him and his patrons to get the F out.
Well, not only is it enough for what you just mentioned, but it's also enough to have his local membership in the Chamber of Commerce revoked.
Even though, as he notes, the majority of his 70 employees are immigrants.
He also has other fingers in other industries.
He's got a textile business.
But again, the Chamber of Commerce seems to be united in this idea that, hey, how dare you support President Trump?
That's right.
What?
That's right.
How dare you?
Boyle Heights has become so Vibrant.
The idea that someone would be opposed to illegal immigration, a guy who's an immigrant himself, came the right way, came through the front door, that he should express his views publicly.
According to Jennifer Lahoda, who is the Boyle Heights Chamber of Commerce president, she says, quote, his views are not in line with the values and objectives of the Boyle Heights Chamber of Commerce.
Their objectives apparently are let everybody in.
Abolish ICE.
Their objectives are similar.
The Chamber of Commerce in Boyle Heights and in a lot of cities across the country are directly in line and lockstep with what Mr. Ellison is advocating.
Yes, yes.
But I just thought that this was a remarkable little vignette as to how far the country has become divided on something as crucial and as obvious and as important as what is going on.
What's the future for the United States?
I really am always amazed by these people who really clearly take the view that The place is up for grabs.
Anybody who can get in belongs.
They belong just as much as you or me.
But that's apparently the prevailing view in Boyle Heights, to the point where, if you express some different view, you get kicked out of the Chamber of Commerce.
No.
He did get his membership dues refunded.
Well, I guess there is a small silver lining.
I guess so.
I guess so.
But then, here's another.
You know, you called my attention to this story.
The story about Ronnie Anderson.
And again, it points the way towards a possible future for the United States.
Here's a black man.
He is going to go on a criminal trial in a Louisiana court.
And he is on trial for illegal possession of a firearm by a convicted felon.
So he already has a felony.
He's being tried in East Feliciana Parish, and he says that because the courthouse where his case is to be tried has in front of it a Confederate monument, he can't get a fair trial.
Well, again, the Confederate statue, in the eyes of his lawyer, They say this, it quote, carries a message to African Americans of intimidation and oppression, communicating that justice may not be fair and impartial at a courthouse that was nostalgic and sentimental over the institution of slavery, end quote.
Now this statue was erected back in 1909.
and this the motion that we're talking about here it also states quote the defendant contends that the courthouse is not a place for confederate artifacts and political messages of any kind and in the year 2018 a confederate monument and the entryways of the courthouse is a divisive political statement end quote now this argument It seems absurd to us, obviously to the left, and to a regrettable number of conservatives I probably would agree when you get rid of that statue, but it sets in motion a dangerous precedent because I'm sure in front of courthouses all across the country there are statues to
Other white men who have no connection to the Confederacy but were founding fathers who might have been slave owners.
There are probably courthouses that are named for slaveholders.
That same logic that this wonderful law-abiding citizen who was obviously just He's been impacted with structural inequality his whole life, which has compelled him to engage in felonies and then have a gun when he's under the auspices of a felony.
It's obviously due to that Confederate statue.
So, let's get rid of it, tear it down.
One thing that's not mentioned here is, couldn't this argument be taken even further and stated that, hey, we should let any black person who has tried and jailed in this courthouse out?
Because of the shadow of that Confederate statue, it presided over our hearing.
And that's not fair.
We didn't get a fair hearing.
That's right.
If it's unfair for Ronnie Anderson, it was unfair for every single black who has passed through its doors.
Bingo.
Absolutely right.
Now, as they point out, as this filing points out, the monument was erected at a time when Jim Crow was a legal part of the life in East Feliciana Parish and all over the South.
And therefore it symbolizes inequality.
Well, the fact is the courthouse has been up for even longer than the statue.
Is the courthouse itself, the fact that it was erected at the time of the Jim Crow era, does that mean that it is so terribly tainted?
Is this a perfect example of institutional racism?
The racism that emanates from the walls of the building because of the terrible Jim Crow people who built it, who worked in it, who presided over it?
This is just nuts!
But he says that any black Who walks into a courthouse with a towering display of Confederate reverence.
That's how he's put it.
Or a monument to those sentimental over the institution of slavery.
He's got the whole thing wrong anyway.
It's as if, it's as if this were a statue of a white man beating a black man in chains.
But that is typical of the left, typical of so many blacks, to be utterly, utterly incapable of making a distinction between reverence for the people who fought for the lost cause, for southern independence, and brutality to blacks.
For them, there's just exactly the same thing.
But this I appreciate you bringing this to my attention, because yet, like this Asher Shalom guy, who can't express his opposition to illegal immigration without these people trying to run him out of town, here is a black man who says, you know, no fair trial is possible.
See, it's a story like this that gives me great hope.
Again, it takes dramatic examples to shake people out of their apathy, and I can see that this guy will, you know, Maybe he won't be given another place to go, a change of venue, but the same logic, the same rationale could go to a place where the judge agrees and says, you know what?
Yes, we are going to move.
You try it once, maybe it'll fail.
Try it twice.
Try it three times.
Eventually we'll get to the point of someone will say, well, I can't be tried in a city named after a slaveholder, Washington.
No, impossible.
Impossible.
The racism of that man permeates every institution here, every square foot of Washington, D.C.
Too much of the implicit bias was built into the walls of the courthouse, even though I'm sure they'll try and argue, well, it was probably slave labor.
that built this courthouse so anyways right built into the mortar yeah so uh insanity in the united states from insanity here we move to insanity in britain insanity is not strong enough word for this next story ah you're right this was a recent report came out this week issued by the national crime agency of britain And what this found is that the grooming gang activities, of course, this were by these Asians, as they call them, almost always Pakistanis who get a hold of these poor, vulnerable white girls and turn them into prostitutes and exploit them, rape them.
I think our listeners are entirely familiar with this grooming activity.
But Rotherham became a terrible scandal in 2014.
According to this report, as far back as 2002, 12 years earlier than that, the authorities were aware of what was going on and they failed to act.
Now the National Crime Agency According to their investigation, probably more than 1,500 girls and young women may very well have been abused in Rotherham between 1997 and 2013.
1,500.
This is just going on and nobody did a thing about it.
Well, as this article, as this makes clear, it had been going on for five years.
They knew it was going on and then they sat on the data.
Yes.
They didn't do a damn thing.
Yes.
Yes.
And the report talks about the blatant failures by the police and the labor-run local council.
I think it's interesting they point out that it was labor-run.
Yes.
Now would the Tories have done any better?
No, probably not.
We're not sure.
Even as far back as 2002, they were so terrified of accusations of racism that they decided to sit on this.
And so, apparently it was not until The Times, the newspaper The Times, made a report in 2014 of what they had, not the police, what a newspaper discovered, that in 2014, then it became a scandal and then they started arresting people.
Had the Times not done that, it would probably still be a rumor that the BNP put out in their newsletters and they were attacked.
This is just evidence that the BNP is xenophobic.
That they would dare accuse these wonderful immigrants who are enriching Rotterdam so wonderfully with the restaurants and these stores.
They're doing jobs that the white Britons just won't do.
Whatever they say over there about immigrants in England.
That they say the same things.
And this, of course, is just Rotherham.
There have been similar grooming scandals in so many different British cities, and I suspect it has been going on for just as long, and it's been covered up for just as long.
Rape is a tool of war and we know what's going on, what colonization by the third world people, by the Pakistani, by the Asians as they call them, they're Muslims.
We know what this represents.
It is again, rape has throughout human history, it's a tool of war.
You know, it's, it's, you're dispossessing your people.
What do you do?
You take their women.
Yes, that's right.
And it is your seed that prevails over those of the locals.
But, uh, There are two things that go through my mind about this.
When I think about the mentality of the Pakistanis who are doing this, they obviously despise us.
They obviously despise us.
They think they can take British women and mistreat them in the worst, most vulgar, most contemptuous way and nothing happens.
So the fact that they do this because they despise us, they do it and they get away with it, that's going to make them despise us even more.
What must they think about this society?
And I wonder too, could something like this happen in the United States?
I mean, I think if something like this were happening, there might be some male relative of one of these 13-year-old girls who would walk into one of these places and shoot a dozen people.
I think it would be a suicidal thing to do, but I think that Americans, at some level, would just take the law into their own hands.
If the police were ignoring it, I can imagine some angry white guy, some father or brother, just, look, this is too much.
Bang, bang, bang.
Look at that story Lawrence Oster did about interracial rape that came out.
Gosh, has it been 11 years when that first appeared at David Horowitz's front page magazine and then he was unceremoniously said, hey thanks but you'll never get published here again.
Where he basically showed, using FBI data, that there were a handful, if even any, white on black rapes and then he showed the number of black on white rapes.
I don't have that same Happy view.
I mean, think about it this way.
In England, there's been maybe one person who really tried to do something about it, and that was Tommy Robinson, and he's in jail right now.
And that, and going back to what you're saying, what do these Asians, what do these Muslims think?
Well, they've got to be reading the story about how the English justice system, which
was so terrified of being called racist back in 2002, they now in 2018 are happy to throw
this white bloke in jail for trying to film a couple of these rapists who are going to
jail because they wouldn't get a fair trial or whatever legalese they used over in England.
Obviously we don't want to talk about vigilantism too much, but it is so disgusting because
we're about to get to the next point.
Some really dastardly data that just showcases that this idea of white cuckness in the face of non-white raping, non-white groping, non-white sexual molestation of our women, of our people, is covered up All across Western Europe?
Yes, yes.
The thing about it is, it is true that nobody is aware of the lopsided nature of black-on-white rape as opposed to white-on-black rape.
White-on-black and white-on-black gang rape, it's practically non-existent.
I remember when, who was that stripper who No, no, no, no, no, no.
This is a vanishingly rare crime.
down Duke? Yes, this man who the Duke lacrosse team had gang raped her. From the outset I thought no no no no no no
this is a vanishingly rare crime and so of course it did turn out to be a hoax but it's it's different in Britain
because the equivalent would be that black men who raped white women are getting off that nobody's investigating.
That's not the case.
I think they get investigated just as hard as any other kind of rape.
And so if you do that, you go to jail.
Whereas, they are deliberately looking the other way when a non-white group is raping and exploiting white girls.
That's a different state of mind.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I think, I really do, I can imagine, it's not out of the question, that some male relative, if this had happened in the United States, would be in there guns blazing.
But no, to point out, to make the point that you were making, that this is such a widespread activity, the big scandal that everyone has heard about, of course, was the New Year's Eve 2015 mass gropings of German women in that big place, in that big square before the Cologne railroad station.
As it turned out, no fewer than 359 women filed official complaints.
And you can imagine, for every woman who filed, there must have been 1, 2, 5 who were groped in a similar way and just didn't bother.
This was a massive, massive thing.
And, of course, it was covered up.
The Cologne police were officially told, don't talk about this.
Don't talk about this.
And it was leaked out and it was leaked out.
The police came up with some sort of investigation to try to find out what the heck had happened.
But then when it leaked out and became a scandal, then it turned out people started describing exactly the same thing that happened in Berlin, in Dusseldorf, Frankfurt, Hamburg, Stuttgart, all around the country.
All these wonderful newcomers from the Middle East.
These people fleeing poverty and persecution.
These so-called refugees had been behaving exactly the same way and in every single city the thing had been covered up.
Yeah.
It's state policy.
Yes, but then to me, the guy who really gets the back of the hand is German Interior Minister Ralf Jaeger.
When the word came out about all of this happening and it all being covered up by the authorities, not surprisingly, there were a few Germans who started posting rude comments about these newcomers on internet sites.
And Interior Minister Ralph Yeager was quoted as saying this,
what happens on the right-wing internet platforms and in chat rooms is at least as awful
as the acts of those assaulting the women.
What can you say?
What can you say?
Saying that, wait a minute, these newcomers, we don't want them here.
That is at least as bad, maybe worse, maybe worse than surrounding women, groping them, I won't even go into details, the kind of thing they were trying to do.
The audacity of this comment is galling, but it demonstrates the mindset of the ruling elite of Western Europe.
Who today, the story came out that the EU is looking to find a way to punish Hungary for what they're doing with the Stop Soros laws.
You have to understand, it is official state policy of the EU to be on the side of the Saracen hordes overwhelming Western Europe that are now being denied access to Poland, to Hungary, to Czechoslovakia, to Croatia, increasingly to Austria.
To Italy.
I mean, this is a moment, we are at a moment in time where a figure could appear that could become the catalyst for the West's awakening.
And I've argued since the day this man came down, Trump Tower Escalator, that it was a guy, as silly as it sounds, a guy named Donald J. Trump who was going to be the man to Usher in the next era of Western civilization.
Whether or not he knew what he was doing, which I think the answer is he has no idea that he's doing this.
But, Mr. Taylor, I'll let you take away what he told one Tucker Carlson.
Well, I think you give him too much credit.
But anyway, he did say, and I do have to credit him for having said such things as explicitly as that not one European country has been improved by a massive influx of immigrants and refugees.
And in his interview with Tucker Carlson on Fox, he said Europe's culture is being destroyed by loose border laws.
And here's a quotation.
The immigration policies in Europe are a disaster.
You're destroying Europe.
You're destroying the culture of Europe.
Crime is up in those areas.
And you better do something.
Yes, absolutely right.
The President of the United States is really speaking in what could be racially conscious terms.
Of course, this is why he's accused of being a white supremacist and basically a Nazi, ethnic cleansing, etc.
But it is, of course, as you point out, profoundly significant that the so-called leader of the so-called free world is saying these things.
But I do tend to believe that Europe would be on its current path with or without Donald Trump.
And it is in Europe where we see these significant things.
He gives Eastern Europe protection, whereas a President Clinton would have been siding with Brussels and wanting to do sanctions with the full power of the United States behind ostracizing Hungary, Poland, Czechoslovakia, and these other nations, saying we can impose sanctions on them for not wanting to be overwhelmed with illegal immigrants, non-whites, Muslims,
so that then the local media and local police working in tandem with the government can cover up
the sex crimes that are transpiring against Hungarian women, just as we saw in Rotterdam
and all across Germany in 2015, New Year's Eve 2016.
It's funny.
One of the things that we've not really discussed, because I actually don't think we've given Trump enough
credit.
And I know you're laughing.
It was during his campaign.
We're getting ready for the first primaries in 2015.
New Year's Eve when this happened in Cologne.
It's then 2016.
Websites like Breitbart, Daily Caller, these other websites that really were trying to We want a Trump deportation force.
Trump were trying to show us this is where things are headed. Look how bad
things are in the old country. We can't let them get that bad here. This is when
Trump was really saying things about we want no we want a Trump deportation
force, we want a Muslim ban. I better not get too far into that because I was
actually at a pretty crazy event one time when something had happened and
Trump then came out with one of his great comments about Muslim immigration.
But my point is this.
Donald Trump came out at the right time.
He kept saying the right things, which were buttressed by events that happened the next day or the next week.
It's crazy the way things are happening, which brings us to, I think, the big story that's going on in Europe.
And as Donald Trump kept saying, you're losing Europe.
Paris is no longer Paris, he said back in 2015.
Then in 2017, Macron got really mad at him because he said, hey, France is no longer France.
Right.
You know, I have friends who go there and they tell me what's going on.
And what just happened in the World Cup?
Again, for Americans like me, for you, I could care less about soccer.
I actually, I'll be blunt, I despise watching soccer.
I don't mind playing it.
It's actually a lot of fun to run around.
But watching soccer, you know what?
I'd rather go watch reruns of the Golden Girls or Name your sitcom that you despise, listener.
But what was fascinating about the World Cup this year, and there were a couple articles that appeared on American Renaissance.
Written by?
Written by?
Go ahead, don't be modest.
They were written by Paul Kersey.
They were written by Paul Kersey.
They were written by me.
They pointed out the enormity of this final game between France and Croatia.
Croatia, a country of 4 million people, only 517,000 of the Croatian population was between the ages that would make them even eligible for the World Cup.
So they're a tiny, tiny sample versus France, a country of 67 million and they had 7 million Men who are of the age to be eligible for the World Cup.
So, you talk about this huge country versus this small, tiny country.
In the World Cup final, you had an all-white Croatian team versus a... I don't think you can call them a French team.
Trevor Noah of The Daily Show, who's half-black, himself a South African, he got in a lot of trouble when he said on the show two nights ago, hey, Africa won the World Cup.
And some French diplomat said, no, no, no, they're French.
How dare you?
No, no, no.
They're Africans.
Trevor Noah gets it.
More than 60%, nearly two-thirds of the French team were from Africa, either Black Africa or North Africa.
And seven of the members of the 23-man roster for France were Muslims.
That's right.
Practicing Muslims.
You can find pictures of the, quote, French team, end quote, you know, bowing down to Mecca after the game.
And, okay, yeah, I'm sure Charles Martel really fought hard so that the French team Could one day be only 6 of 23 or 7 of 23 were actually white Frenchmen?
Right, right.
And it was quite fascinating.
The French have their own group of so-called anti-racist organizations.
One is called, it's known by its French initials, L-I-C-R-A, it's called LICRA.
But that stands for the International League Against Racism and Antisemitism.
And the Paris branch of the organization tweeted out something very interesting.
This is before the game started.
Correct.
And this is my translation for the French, which I will assure you is pretty accurate.
And they said, today's match is historically and sociologically very significant.
This afternoon, the multicolored and multi-ethnic French team will play a Croatian team that is dramatically uniform.
Rich only in themselves.
And that plays a monotonous, colorless, flavorless game.
France will win.
It gathers together. It welcomes. It understands.
Diversity, diversity, diversity.
Wow.
I mean, a Croatian team that is dramatically uniform, rich only in themselves, that plays a monotonous, colorless, flavorless game.
What is it they said about the BBC at one point?
Hideously white.
Hideously white.
Well, there was an article that appeared in an early, I think it was June 15th issue, before the World Cup kicked off, commenced.
The World Cup, of course, was held in Russia, and the Mother Jones Writer actually said, Russia's too white to win the World Cup.
Now, of course, Russia made it quite far.
Shocking effort.
They made it to the quarterfinals and they lost to Croatia in an overtime game by one goal.
And then, of course, Croatia went on to defeat a multiracial England, the English team, in overtime as well to make it to this game where they battled this French team.
And what was so fascinating is the reaction by Leftists, by journalists, by policymakers the world over who are celebrating this French team as if it was some great victory over over crime statistics and social capital and everything that we know is going on in France.
I mean France is in a permanent state of emergency.
permanent state of emergency in their constitution because of the crisis of
terror attacks that have happened from you know in 2015 at the what was it the
Bataclan yeah and then it and the country where the little girl was run
with the city was it nice yes yeah you think about all these terror attacks
that have happened in France in the past couple years we're supposed to forget
all of this and base our social policy moving forward on the fact that a team
of 17 of 23 non-whites somehow is capable of uniting a country and
displacing the reality of race that is drowning France in a Well, take it away.
That was the point of one of your two very excellent articles, which I would urge all of our listeners to read, if they haven't already.
But as you point out, the attitude of the left, not just in France, but really around the world, was, look, this justifies immigration.
If you can field a world-class soccer team, then it makes no difference.
Whether you're in a constant state of emergency, it makes no difference.
If you have to build a wall around the Eiffel Tower, it makes no difference.
If you have to call off Christmas markets because they might be attacked by Muslims, it makes no difference.
Look, they won the World Cup, so it's all better now.
And what's so fascinating about this, The past three World Cup victors prior to this victory by the multiracial French team in 2018.
In 2006, it was a team of all-white Italians.
2010, it was all-white Spaniards.
2010, it was all white Spaniards. In 2014, a German team that was... you look at the
picture of that German team and there's only three non-Germans on the team.
One's a Turk, one's black, and one is one I think was Alger... I can't remember what... It's almost a team of all white Germans in 2014.
And you think back to the press's reaction.
I don't recall one article ever being published anywhere that glorified the homogeneity.
No.
And if we want to borrow a term from the Ligra, you know, the dramatically uniform, rich only in themselves, German, Spanish, or Italian teams that won their respective years.
Yes, who played monotonous, colorless, flavorless soccer.
Good grief.
No, you're absolutely right.
And you had pointed out in the article that you wrote before the final If it's the Croatian team that, in this David versus Goliath contest, David happened to win, they say, ah, it's only a game.
It's only a game.
Absolutely right.
But because this piebald, multi-culti team happens to walk off of the World Cup, oh my gosh, we can all bow down before the streaks.
Open your borders, white man.
That's right.
And enjoy the vibrancy that's going to come in, because you might lose your country.
But hey, every 20 years, you might win a World Cup.
But we don't have much time left, but I did want to include this last story about a country that does want to maintain its character and is passing laws to ensure that.
And this is the state of Israel.
They recently passed something called the Nation State Law that describes Israel as the national home of the Jewish people.
And it goes on to say, the right to exercise national self-determination is unique to the Jewish people.
In other words, this is our place and we're going to decide what's going to happen.
And it singles out Hebrew as the state's national language, which essentially prioritizes over Arabic, which had been one of the official languages alongside Hebrew.
So, This is the first time.
I didn't realize this hadn't been done before.
I thought that Israel had a constitution.
The constitution said it was a Jewish state, but no.
Israel doesn't even have a constitution.
Right.
It has these set of basic laws, of which this one is the 14th.
But this is the one that finally says this is the national home of the Jewish people, and it's the Jewish people who call the shots and make the rules.
Well, Israel has a population that's about 20% Arab.
Of course, the Arabs are up in arms, screaming blue murder.
But, I must say, hats off to the Israelis.
And this is the kind of expression of nationality that is not, of course, limited to Israel, but is now increasingly common in Eastern Europe.
Well, Israel has a big, beautiful wall that I wish we could replicate.
Israel has wonderful rules when it comes to repatriation of non-Israelis.
Of infiltrators, as they call them.
Yes, of infiltrators, which I wish we could emulate.
And now Israel has set in stone, or has enshrined into law, what they determine is national self-determination for their people.
That's right, that's right.
That's what we want for us.
But is that so awful?
Apparently it is.
Apparently it is.
Apparently it is because the entire world is united against that concept.
But not the entire world.
Don't forget Eastern Europe.
But anyway, no, I did want to mention this promising and gratifying development in Israel that's catching all sorts of criticism, not only from the Arabs in the country, but from a few liberal anti-racists in the United States.
Not so many, not so many.
It's not nearly as bad as if Hungary or Poland or the Czech Republic were to do this, but yes, good for Israel, good for the Eastern Europeans, and someday, good for us.
Hey, you know what?
What's also good for us, we thank you guys so much for listening.
This hour flew by.
I'm actually shocked to look up and see that almost an hour has gone by, but I did want to point out, we love getting questions from you.
We would love to answer some in an episode in the future.
So, if you have any questions you'd like to pose to American Renaissance, to Jared or myself, fire them over to sbpdl1 at gmail.com.
Once again, that email address is sbpdl1, the numeral one, at gmail.com or you can send them to the contact us page at amran.com.
Yeah, we'd love to have your questions.
We'd love to actually get back to try and answer a few.
It's just there's so much going on that, hey, We wanted to address it all for you, the listeners.
So, for Jared Taylor, I'm Paul Kersey.
Our time is up.
▲
Export Selection