All Episodes
Previous Next
May 11, 2021 - Radio Renaissance - Jared Taylor
39:30
Why Won't Whites Defend Themselves?
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hello, I'm Jared Taylor with American Renaissance.
It's a great pleasure to have in the studio today a good friend and stalwart comrade in the movement, Sam Dixon.
Sam has been an activist for our people longer than many of you have even been alive.
He is also one of the most eloquent spokesmen for our movement and our race.
He can give a better talk, off the cuff, impromptu, than I can with a month's preparation.
Sam is a graduate of the University of Georgia and the University of Georgia Law School and, more significant in my view, he has been the closing speaker at every American Renaissance conference ever since 1994 and he will also be performing that same role in our next conference in July later this year.
So welcome, Sam.
Delighted to have you.
I'm delighted to be here.
Well, Sam, it's my impression That you have been a racially conscious white man all your life, but is that in fact the case?
Tell us a little bit about your background and your rearing.
Well, I grew up in a quintessentially WASP family.
We were descendants almost entirely from Presbyterians, heavily Scottish, French Huguenot, some German.
But I grew up in a WASP America pre-Brown v.
Topeka Board of Education, at least the first seven years.
And it was a very nice America.
It's a very stern upbringing, as you can imagine, having been a Presbyterian yourself.
But not one I regret.
I learned a lot and toughened up.
But racially speaking, I cannot recall any epiphany, any moment at which I realized racial truths.
I never accepted the idea of equality.
I just assumed as a child that it was obvious that biology affected individuals and people and that people were not equal and that races would therefore not be equal.
And so I've never remembered a time when I ever believed in the official ideology of the day.
Well then, unlike those of us who started off as liberals, then I suppose you can't point to a particular book or a particular person or a particular experience that changed your mind.
Not really.
The books reinforced what I instinctively understood to be the truth.
I did read opposing books in Trinidad.
I had to in school, as you will remember.
Well, you would not remember.
You were not here in America at the time.
There's a myth about that a lot of people believe, which is that somehow in the 1950s and'60s, Americans were taught racial truths and that what we're hearing today from people like Hillary Clinton is some new breakthrough.
It was not at all that way.
It was as liberal when I was in fifth grade as it is today.
The textbooks were as liberal.
The teaching was as liberal.
And we were told that science had proven that the races were equal.
I do remember the first time a teacher told me that, and I thought she was joking.
I burst out laughing at anyone believing anything so ridiculous.
But there were books, in fact, that I found very helpful.
The ones specifically, which I think are still the best introductory material, would be Carlton Putnam's Race and Reason and later Race and Reality.
They had a big effect in clarifying and reinforcing what I believe are the truths of race.
So let me get this right.
Even in the South, and this would have been in the 1950s, your teachers were telling you that science had proven that the races are basically interchangeable.
Yes. Around 1952 or so, I didn't know this at the time, somewhere in the early 50s, the United Nations issued a declaration stating that science had found that the races were equal.
And the groups like the NEA and the teachers unions and stuff, they always have been on the left.
This was just adopted, and it was just announced that science had proven this.
And you had to be a very bad child to ask what scientists and where were the proof.
And now that I found out later in life about this U.N. Declaration, I found it was just a bunch of politicians.
At that time, a third of the members of the U.N. were communist bloc nations.
So you just had these sort of Lysenkoists who issued this fatwa, and it was taken up by American education.
Well, it may surprise you to know that in 1960, I was in the fourth grade, and I went to a segregated school in Richmond, Virginia, for a year.
And I remember my teacher, her name was Bela Outlaw.
She was a great southern patriot.
She would disallow the word"civil war" in her classroom.
It was the war between the states, or she even talked about the war of Northern aggression.
But, and she said, I remember vividly to this day, one day in class, she explained to us, they're talking about bringing black children here, and you all better be prepared for this.
And she says, if they bring a black child, I'm going to bling that child, put him in a desk, and treat him exactly like the rest of you all, so you all get ready for that.
This is in 1960.
I'm not surprised at all.
Well, no, you might be surprised to know that in the fourth grade I was in the United States.
Oh, that.
Yes, that aspect of it.
But, yes, it's interesting.
Of all the things that she said, that's probably the phrase that I remember word for word.
Of all the millions of words that lady spoke, and I had a great respect and admiration for her, but it struck me, even then, without much of a racial consciousness at all, that she was preparing us for integration.
Odd how that just stuck in my mind all these years.
Well, in any case, I know that you have used your law degree.
To try to defend our cause in some respects.
Can you tell us about some of your adventures in the law?
Well, that would eat up the whole interview time.
Well, then some of your most vivid adventures.
Well, I think the greatest victory was when we sued the Olympic Games officials in Roswell, Georgia, who had banned the Confederate flag, every other flag of every nation and group on Earth, except, of course, the Germans in the 30s.
I'm sure that goes without saying.
We're going to be allowed to have their flag, but there will be no Confederate flags.
And we sued them and we went before a female white judge who very quickly disposed of their arguments and said that this is clearly unconstitutional under the First Amendment and you must permit this to happen.
As a result, several hundred appeared with the Confederate flags, much to the chagrin of the Atlanta Chamber of Commerce and the Olympic Games officials.
So there were several hundred...
I charged no fee.
I said the fee would be that they had to have hundreds of people with Confederate flags to really, really stick it to them.
Well, in a way, I can see the other argument.
There was no Confederate team.
Now, this is the battle flag, presumably, not even the national flag.
This is a parade in which everybody was supposed to be allowed to take place.
Lay people, local citizens, German-American clubs, B'nai B'rith, the labor unions, everything, except...
People with Confederate flags.
I see.
So there were many flags that were not necessarily national flags.
Correct. I see.
It was specifically focused at the Confederate flag.
That would not be allowed.
Well, bravo.
Bravo. But I'm not sure that really applies to our movement.
I don't want to overemphasize the Southern thing.
I am a Southerner.
I'm very comfortable being a Southerner.
But I do not think that our race is benefited by quarrels between white Yankees and white Southerners.
I agree.
I agree entirely on that.
I remember as a southerner, when I would read about Chancellorsville, I would think to myself, oh boy, we're going to whip them this time.
Now I read about those things and I just grieve.
Both sides killing each other.
Just what a terrible thing it was.
But anyway, what do you think about the present political situation in the United States?
From the point of view of our race?
I find it very encouraging.
I think it's really breaking down along racial lines.
As to the situation in general beyond politics and mega-politics, our enemies are doing everything that I would have them do.
The one person, the only one group that is not failing us is our enemies.
They are pushing this race thing.
They will not let it die.
They will not leave it alone.
They keep worrying it.
It isn't working for them, and so their reaction is always to press down on the accelerator.
If it's not working, we need to send more non-whites to Sweden.
We need to have Broader busing.
We need to have more of a so-called conversation about race, which whites will be told how rotten and awful they are.
This has created a lot of opportunities for us, and whites now in South Dakota are no longer isolated in an immunity bubble from experience to reality to these things.
I was very intrigued in the Democratic primary.
This is something very few of our people have noticed or talked about.
But the Democratic Party itself split almost exactly on racial and ethnic grounds, with the Jews, the Hispanics and Blacks voting for Hillary.
And the white Democrats, white Christian Democrats, voting for Bernie Sanders.
Now, superficially, that would seem to be a very odd thing, because the whites were voting for the one that was actually more dedicated to being adversarial to us than even Hillary.
But it shows that race is the ultimate reality.
They're breaking it down on racial lines.
Probably visit this later in the interview, but it's very important for us to get shed of old ideas and old limitations about being part, ideas of being part of a conservative movement.
We're not part of a conservative movement.
Of course, when it came to the general election, what was it, 45% of whites did nevertheless vote for Hillary Clinton.
They did join forces behind this candidate who did pander to non-whites in what were often the most shameful ways.
This remains to me something of a mystery, just why so many whites can line up.
And salute to a candidate who is clearly oriented towards non-whites.
And it seems to me, I agree with you, by the way, that the Democrats, the lefties, the black bloc, all of these people are behaving exactly as we would wish in ways that would just drive people into our arms.
But this new head of the Democratic Party, Perez, he's a Hispanic.
His deputy is Keith Ellison, a Muslim black.
Those people could not have been chosen better to send a message to the Democrats, we are not your party if you are white.
I agree.
This is a wonderful, wonderful development.
This may be a difficult question.
It's always a difficult question when people ask me this, but why is it that whites are so uniquely susceptible to this kind of dispossession mentality?
Why are we so easy to exploit psychologically, whereas no other race appears to be subject to this?
Well, I thought about that a lot, as you have, and I can't claim this is all original thinking, but I have sought answers, and I think I have found answers.
It's a commonplace saying that our virtues are our vices, and our vices are our virtues.
Anything taken to an extreme becomes a mistake.
Whites have the greatest capacity for abstract reasoning.
And they have a great power of imagination that exceeds the other races of the world, the Orientals, the Semitic peoples, the black people.
We are carried away by artwork.
I made this point before that in the 1800s, when Dickens was writing his novels that were being serialized, the whites would gather in Boston to find out whether Little Nell had died.
And they would weep when they found out in the next installment that she was dead because little Nell had become real to them.
And the abstract becomes real to white people.
And they can live in a world of abstractions in a way that Orientals, for instance, cannot and blacks cannot.
And this is a great strength that's enabled us to explore science and create the periodic table and this sort of thing.
It enables us to vote to please our college sociology professor and the newspaper editor and the priest, rather than to vote for our own children.
So you think it's this capacity for abstraction, in other words, an ability to get beyond our own person, family, tribe, etc., that makes us capable of thinking of sort of the broader picture of others' interests?
Is that part of your argument?
No, it's the ability to ignore reality.
To live in a world of abstractions that isn't real.
I think I compared it one time after talking to some NBA candidates at Georgia State who insisted, even though they eventually conceded, that free trade would ultimately be devastating for the United States.
They said, but we've got to support free trade.
Basically, that's what the rules say.
And I told a friend of mine who was there at this discussion that whites are the kind of people that if they're on a road, they've got a map, and they come to the Grand Canyon, and it shows a bridge across the Grand Canyon.
There's no bridge there.
Whites will just go on driving because the bridge has to be there.
The abstraction says that the bridge is there.
But a people like that could not have engineered the scientific revolution.
A people like that could not have gone to the moon.
I think a people like that precisely could go to the moon because they could get into the world of the periodic table and away from the world of the compost heap in the backyard and fertilizing the tomatoes.
One goes hand in hand.
They go hand in hand with each other.
Those are real things.
And after all, our race...
It's only within the last perhaps 70 or 80 years that we've become susceptible to this.
You know all of the accounts of the colonization impulse, bringing the brown-skinned heathens to the paths of righteousness, not just in Christianity, but the French had this mission civilisatrice.
Whites were brimming with confidence up until about maybe the time of the First World War and continuing after that.
It seems to me there's been a sudden collapse that does not reflect something that is necessarily a deep and permanent aspect of our mentality.
Well, I think the potential was always there, and I also think that you're factually misinformed when you say that it was not there.
You find traces of this insanity all the way back through white people, the children's crusade.
That if we send the children to fight the Muslims, they will be without a sin.
And so they shipped all of these children off who promptly ended up in the slave pens and harems of the Muslim world.
Read the history of the Bay Calling.
Again, getting back to this South versus North thing, I also dislike the attacks on Puritans, because many of my ancestors were Puritans from New England.
And so I have kind of a foot in each camp on that score.
When they arrived in New England, the Pilgrim Fathers, their colony, the colonizers were split almost down the middle, but about half of them had a Peace Corps, a John Kennedy, a social uplift thing where they set out to bring the Indians up.
They even allowed Indians to serve on juries and sit in judgment on white men accused of committing crimes against Indians.
Sam, I know that our race has had these flirtations with insanity.
The Grimke sisters, for example.
They were so ugly they had to be communists.
Well, now you sound like Milo Yiannopoulos.
But this was an aberration.
The abolitionist movement, as you know, was based on the idea that slavery was an injustice.
We had to free these Africans, but once they were freed, we were going to send them away.
Some thought that, but many thought otherwise.
Garrison, who could be considered, I think, the leading voice of abolitionism in America, he was emphatic that they must not be sent back, that it would be death for them.
I agree.
Garrison and the Grimke sisters, but there was a...
Ferocious opposition to the idea of blacks being freed and set up as our equals in our society.
Of course, as I say, I consider that a kind of aberration, just as, oh, the French Revolution, this egalitarian insanity of the French Revolution.
That is really a reflection of some aspect of white people.
Exactly, Bolshevism.
We have these periodic delusions and insanities that sweep things.
But getting back to this, These instances before were not as common today, but that also was because we were living in a society in which people were rural.
They were in touch with life.
They had to kill their own meat.
They had to plow their own fields.
They had to do their own thinking.
A farmer thinks a lot behind that plow, contrary to the sneering at farmers that you get now from sophisticates in Manhattan and Hollywood.
They had to live close to the land, so it was not as easy to harbor illusions as it is when you're living in a modern city today and you're in your condo building and this kind of thing.
It's much easier.
Also television.
You and I come from a Calvinist tradition.
Another reason why the Puritans and Calvinists are scoffed at is that we quite properly took a very dim view of theatrical performances.
And I think that there's a good reason for that.
Theatrical performance absorbs both the eye and the ear.
There's very little capacity for creating the image of Scarlett O'Hara when you watch Gone with the Wind.
And television now can reach into every household in society.
Queen Elizabeth I, when she was leading us out of the Church of Rome, didn't have the capacity to get the religious propaganda into every peasant's hut in Ireland.
Had she had that, The Reformation would have been a lot easier.
But Sam, to play devil's advocate against your argument that I don't necessarily disagree with in toto, the Asians are just as urbanized as we are.
The Asians are just as drenched with television as we are.
The Asians, in fact, there are more American-made movies on Japanese screens than Japanese-made movies.
And yet, they still mostly shrug off this nonsense.
Because they don't have the capacity to live in a world of imagination and abstraction.
You would never get Japanese gathering on the docks in Tokyo waiting to find out if Little Nell was dead.
This is a peculiar white affliction.
On the contrary, Japanese can get so wrapped up in what they call television dramas that the whole country stops work to find out what is going to happen to the character.
It's almost exactly the same thing.
So it's not as though the Japanese are incapable of living in some kind of unreal world.
I just think they have some kind of natural resistance to this racial capitulation.
That's what I think, too.
I think they have a natural mental resistance, and I still think that they, I don't know, but I think that the white capacity for abstract thinking and the white capacity for imagination play big roles.
And then I think they're exploited by the fact that we live in a multi-ethnic society, and we face a coalition of ethnic groups.
Whose policy it is to deracinate us and to reduce us to individuals so as to maximize their penetration of our society.
The Oriental peoples and black peoples of the world do not have that problem.
It's true.
They live in homogeneous societies.
And so even if there is a message of racial egalitarianism they get from some blockbuster hit American movie, it just rolls off their backs.
Whereas, for us, it's all part of a systematic campaign.
But I think an interesting aspect of this, though, is that the healthy racial attitudes that East Europeans continue to have.
What Viktor Orban is doing in Hungary.
What Robert Fico is doing in the Czech Republic.
These people are very clear.
No muzzies in our country.
No refugees in our countries.
And they are saying this in a way that makes it clear that they consider themselves to be defending European Christian values.
They do.
I think that that reflects the recency.
Of our capitulation.
Because they were protected behind the Iron Curtain.
We used to feel so sorry for those people behind the Iron Curtain.
But they were protected from the terrible poisons that are eating away at our sense of identity.
And it seems to me that they reflect very much sort of the pre-poisoned mentality of Western man.
I mean, they were behind that curtain ever since, well, certainly since the Second World War.
Since 1945.
And to me, it's almost a race to see whether or not they can be seduced by the blandishments of the richer West, or whether or not they will be able to preserve their civilizations.
But that suggests to me that they are white people in more or less the natural state, abstractions and all, unless you think that perhaps the Slavs are less capable than the Western Europeans of the kind of abstract thought.
On the contrary, to borrow your phrase.
A Slavophile.
I love Germans.
I certainly love Anglo-Saxons, since I am an Anglo-Saxon, and I don't mean to put my own people down, but if I were a file, it would be a Slavophile.
I like Slavs.
And I think that the reason is not because they were sealed off from what we had here in America, from Sesame Street and all this kind of stuff.
It's because history kept a hard school for them.
I believe sort of in Jung's idea of a racial folk consciousness.
Those people in Eastern Europe, they had no margin of error.
When you've been taught by Mongols, as the Russians were for three centuries, you learn a lot.
Our people were isolated, the Anglo-Saxons specifically, were isolated on an island.
We were last successfully invaded in 1066.
The big ethnic struggles that we faced were things between the Welsh and the English, or the Irish and the Scots.
They were nothing compared to what Poles or Greeks or Romanians faced with Turks and Muslims and Mongols from the East.
Those people had to be tough, and they had to learn tribalism.
You had to know you were a Pole, and you had to stay in your place, and you had to be part of being a Pole.
And that's ingrained, it's hardwired in their thinking, whereas especially for Anglo-Saxons, especially for people from the island off the coast of Europe, we didn't have that hard history.
And then the Enlightenment, the French Revolution, already the French and Spaniards and Germans had not experienced what the Russians and Poles and Ukrainians had experienced.
But then you had this...
Abstraction of the Enlightenment, the idea that principles are more important than race.
And this affects even so-called conservatives today.
I'm not a conservative, but I hear Southerners talk about how, oh, we fought the war for states' rights, not race.
States' rights, it's just a trivial, you know, it's just a temporary political theory specific to a time in history.
You don't live your, you don't die for the principle of states' rights.
Well, it is true that the vicissitudes of war and empire have been harsher for the Eastern Europeans, but it's not as though the French, for example, had never been invaded.
They went back and forth with the Germans.
It's not as though they had this...
Fat, happy island existence.
It's a question of degree.
The French and Germans did invade each other's country, but you did not have, they weren't Mongols.
When the Germans occupied areas of France, they certainly were not Boy Scouts, but a German soldier in World War II, if a German soldier raped a French woman, he was hanged by Germans.
Mongols didn't do that.
Muslims didn't do that.
Well, I still think that it is not a coincidence that it is right along the Iron Curtain line that we have a relatively healthy sense of race.
I think I would draw a parallel between the relative quiescence of blacks and mulattoes in Brazil compared to those all around the world.
And I think a persuasive argument can be made is that they have not been as bullshy as English-speaking blacks because it's a Portuguese-speaking country.
And all of these fancy ideas about egalitarianism and about affirmative action, which are only now really taking root in Brazil, they had a hard time penetrating because they were protected by this language barrier.
And I really do think that the barrier of communism really did protect them.
Well, I don't believe that.
I think Russians would be the same way if the Tsar had been restored in 1919.
I think that it's hard wiring them.
As for the Latin American example, this is something that is very important.
There is a huge difference between Brazil and the United States.
A lot of people say, well, we're just going to have a Brazilianization of America.
That isn't going to happen.
You know, you had the Roman Catholic Church, for whatever its faults may be, it has a lot of virtues, too.
And it encompassed all Brazilian society.
And until recently, until they got these communist priests like this current pope, the priests generally smoothed out social divisions.
They were not preaching race war in the homilies at the mass.
And you had this unifying, moderating influence in Brazil and other countries in Latin America.
That doesn't exist in America.
We have groups like the RASA, the NAACP, the B'nai B'rith, that exist to exacerbate, to pick at the sores, to hone antagonism.
But Sam, let us not forget that liberation theology, all of these communist priests, that started up in Latin America.
But only 50 years ago.
That's not a very long time.
And it hasn't percolated down to the masses.
It takes a long time for these ideas.
It took a long time for Voltaire's and Rousseau's ideas to percolate down where you could actually get the guillotine set up and begin the reign of terror.
Well, I do persist in my view that the Portuguese language did protect Brazil, at least for a period of time, because of all of these crazy ideas were percolating among, first of all, Well, English speakers.
And then we have infected the French speakers and the Spanish speakers.
Portuguese, you know, there's a certain, not a hermetic seal there, but...
Insularity. An insularity.
Yes, an insularity as well.
But, well, if we return to the United States, all of us hope for at least an ethnostate, some land in which we are the recognized majority, in which we can pursue our destiny.
What are the chances of that happening, do you think?
Do you foresee a path to that?
I know that when I first started my career as a racial activist, I would get in debates with Sam Francis about whether or not we could have an entire America that was consciously white.
Now I would be satisfied with a portion of America that was consciously and deliberately white.
What do you see as a realistic process?
I think there is a very realistic prospect.
We face peculiar challenges as white activists, as white nationalists in America, that I don't think European activists face.
And that is, our country was selective for people who came here voluntarily, which was a terrible thing.
I've often said, and people think it's a joke, but it's not a joke.
I really believe it, that the fatal error occurred at Jamestown.
When people were allowed to choose whether they left London to come to Janeson, the king should have simply cordoned off a village and shipped the entire village and created a genuine New England.
Personality traits are inherited as well as physical traits.
America is very much distorted in the direction of individualism and to people for whom race, religion, language were secondary or even tertiary values compared to a better life, as we hear people say of the immigrant that came here for a better life,
i.e., three helpings of sauerkraut a day instead of two.
That was more important to our ancestors than whether they were Germans or Englishmen.
That's why Americans move around like gypsies.
But the very fact that we move around like gypsies makes the actual physical creation of the ethnostate much easier.
The average American moves every four years.
All this talk you hear from people dismissing us, laughing at us among the conservatives and others, that, oh, this is utopian.
People wouldn't do that.
Well, if Americans move to get to a better school for their kids, they move 20 miles away, they move here, move there for some reason, or get a new job in Cincinnati and leave Atlanta.
I would certainly leave immediately if I could move to what I had reasonable prospects would be a permanent home for my people in which I could live with people who were like me and enjoy my culture with people who love that culture instead of living with and under the rule of people who hate that culture and hate my race.
I'd happily move, wouldn't you?
Yes, yes I would, but I have been proposing this idea of a kind of voluntary migration, not in any serious way to the point of having investigated a particularly promising spot.
People have been talking about this for decades, and it really hasn't happened.
What do you think it would take, really, to start a movement in that direction?
Well, it requires preparation.
Long-range planning, which our movement does not do.
It's the most important thing.
You cannot run a life or a business without long-range planning.
With the exception of you and a handful of others, there's nobody in our movement that engages in any planning much at all.
It's all an ad hoc, instantaneous thing.
The old proverb, I love proverbs.
In the winter, the farmer looks to his tools.
If it's snowy outside New England, the New England Yankee goes into his barn, he sharpens his scythe and oils his tractor and this kind of thing.
We prepare now for what will come.
All we can do is prepare.
We will not create it.
We will take advantage of an opportunity which will help create it.
Sam, I think with enough thought and enough commitment...
At this point, there are enough racially conscious white people so that if someone selected a spot with care and said,"All right, this is a promising place." There are enough people now so that we could have a kind of ingathering, at least in a small area.
After all, blacks have had these little colonies of hundreds, certainly hundreds of people.
Orthodox Jews have established their communities, where if you call a plumber, it's going to be an Orthodox Jew.
All of your neighbors are Orthodox Jews.
There is no reason why racially conscious whites could not do that.
Of course, I know that you have argued that there would be a tremendous legal opposition to this, but I think it could be done in a legal way.
It's just no one has taken the initiative.
I've thought about this perhaps once the people who work for me at American Renaissance have put me out to pasture as a doddering no-good.
I might sort of try to establish a community of that kind for people.
I've had the same thought.
In fact, I intend to set up sort of an old folks home.
Aging people like us, we can live safely.
one of the problems, practical problems we're going to face in life for old racial actresses being in a retirement home where the staff can look at you on the Internet and these are the people giving you your meds and your food.
I don't really think you can plan it.
And the number of people who would move there would be too small and you would have too many people that would be marginal people who would fall prey to agents provocateurs.
And yes, the whole apparatus of governmental and societal oppression would be ranged against you as it is not against Orthodox Jews or blacks.
Yes. So I don't really think we can plan it.
We can plan it out.
We need to be thinking about it.
We need to be considering, as I've said before, what kind of government will we have?
The critical question of any such society is going to be, how do we create worthy elites, people who are loyal as opposed to what we have now?
We're ruled by sociopathic, jumped-up white trash.
The upper classes in America are hardly worth saving anymore.
And we have to find a way to create a new upper class drawn from the working people.
Well, if I may quote myself again, on the contrary, you are just lauding the necessity of long-term planning.
And I think if there were a plan, you say we cannot plan for this, that these things will happen spontaneously.
I do believe that there could be a community, but it would require sort of establishing in a sort of informal, underground way to begin with that here is a good location and that this person, this person, this person are all moving there for that reason.
Well, here's a point to consider about what you just said, that people watching said if you should think about it.
We need to get shed of the old, limited thinking, and we need to open ourselves to what my guru, Louise Hay, calls the totality of possibility.
We have this image that there are certain choices.
You can vote Trump in and restore the America of 1952.
There are a lot of people, intelligent people, who really believe that.
There are other people who have this vision of some ferocious race war, like in Haiti, only this time the whites come out.
There are many, many, many options between those two.
I look to Gandhi.
I think the most dangerous figure of opposition for our establishment and for other establishments around the world would be the emergence of a Gandhi figure.
Can you imagine the terror that would grip the Knesset?
If some Gandhi, a bunch of Gandhis emerge in the Arab world and cease wasting all this money on armies and industrializing and improving, that would be the most dangerous Arab that could exist.
We also can resort to either strong or just gradual, understated civil disobedience.
Well, this is a good point to close on.
I certainly agree that we cannot predict what will happen in the future as more and more of us achieve the necessary level of racial consciousness.
I think that our role, at least the role I see of American Renaissance, is simply to get more white people to wake up to the crisis they face.
And that is happening at an unprecedentedly rapid rate today.
And if there are enough people who think the way we do, all kinds of things will begin to happen spontaneously.
There will be communities.
There will be people who run for office locally and maybe even at the congressional level.
All of this, it seems to me, depends on there being a critical mass.
Of white people who are awake.
And it seems to me that that has been your task, my task, for the last 20 or 30 years.
It has been our task.
And it's a necessary condition.
But it is also a necessary condition that you offer people solutions.
And that is the good thing about the ethnostate.
It offers a solution.
For many years we played the game of what I called"Ain't It Awful?" with each movement publication trying to trump the other one on the latest horror story of what happened here or there.
The idea was that if you get this information out, people will come up with a solution.
You have to make the sale.
You have to close the sale.
You have to give people a solution.
Otherwise, they just eventually get demoralized and stop subscribing.
I agree.
And I think one thing that we could do now is establish communities, run for local office.
I've been amazed.
That there haven't been more attractive activists.
And I hope that some of the people who are watching this program, young people, will think in terms of running for school board.
Remember Frank Borzellari?
He was the most important school board member in the entire United States for several years because he stood up for our people, just as a school board member.
Imagine what a mayor of a town could do, a city council, an entire school board.
We're probably running over our limit, but here's a very important point.
And that is, White racial activists must not allow themselves to be marginalized.
I agree.
If they're Catholics, they should go to the cathedral.
If they're Presbyterians, they should go to First Presbyterian.
You should go.
To where the power is.
We must not adopt our enemy's view of us, that we are extremists.
We have to speak with a voice of authority and not raise our voices.
We have to speak to these people as one would to a 15-year-old that you're directing in life who is wrong and needs to be corrected.
And that we have to understand we are the sound, solid people.
And we have to comport ourselves that way.
Yes, I agree 100%.
Well, that wraps it up for now.
Thanks very much for watching, and thank you, Sam Dixon, for gracing our studio with your presence.
▲
Export Selection