THE AIMS OF WHITE NATIONALIST WOMEN'S GROUP IS TO BUILD ARYAN UNITY
To promote co-operation between White Nationalist Organisations throughout the world
To promote awareness of our rich racial heritage
To establish a representative or number of representatives in each Aryan country
To publish a regular internet magazine achieving the widest possible subscriber base
To promote an annual conference open to White Nationalists throughout the world
To discourage personal attacks between different true White Nationalist groups
To give help and encouragement to White Nationalist organisations everywhere and to guide new people to them
To work with the FOURTEEN WORDS as our guide for the preservation of our Aryan people for the future
WE MUST SECURE THE EXISTENCE OF OUR PEOPLE
AND A FUTURE FOR WHITE CHILDREN
What is White Nationalism?
1. Q. What is White Nationalism?
A. The idea that Whites may need to create a separate nation as a
means of defending themselves.
2. Q. Do White Nationalists feel they are superior to other races?
A. No. The desire of White Nationalists to form their own nation has
nothing to do with superiority or inferiority.
3. Q. Do White Nationalists seek to dominate other races?
A. Not at all. In fact, formation of a White Nation removes any
possibility of White dominance of other races, as well as the
plausibility of the accusation that Whites wish to dominate others.
4. Q. Do White Nationalists seek to insulate themselves from
competition from other races?
A. No. A separate White Nation would establish a policy of free trade
with its new neighbors. Labor markets are global, and the formation of
a White Nation would not protect Whites from economic competition.
5. Q. Well if White Nationalists don't feel superior, don't want to
dominate others, and don't seek protection from competition, then why
would they want a separate nation?
A. To avoid exploitation.
6. Q. Exploitation? This is rich! So how is it that Whites are
exploited?
A. It is a long list. Burdensome racial preference schemes in hiring,
race-normed employment tests, racial preference schemes in university
admissions, racial preference schemes in government contracting and
small business loans. Beyond quotas there is the denial of rights of
free speech and of due process to Whites who are critical of these
governmental policies. We have special punishments for vandalism and
assaults committed by Whites if the accused White has ever expressed a
preference for his own kind. In addition, Whites pay a proportion of
the costs of the welfare state that is disproportionate to what they
receive in benefits.
But the most exploitative aspect of the situation is that neither the
racial quotas, the business preferences, the loss of freedom of
speech, nor the disproportionate contributions to the welfare state
have managed to sate the appetites of non-whites living in the United
States.
The more Whites sacrifice, the more non-whites demand. Many Whites are
beginning to believe that no amount of tribute, other than mass
suicide, would satisfy the non-white demands.
If our presence stirs up that much hatred in the hearts of non-
whites, then the only sensible course of action is to separate
ourselves from them.
7. Q. You claim that non-whites are the aggressors and haters in race
relations. Aren't you afraid that most Whites will think this is
ridiculous?
A. Not in the slightest. For the past 30 years most Whites have taken
part in a mass migration or "white flight" away from neighborhoods
inhabited by non-whites. Aggressors don't flee. For example, on a per-
capita basis, blacks are 49 times more likely to assault a White than
a White is to assault a black. The best measure of racism is the
number of non-economically motivated attacks. Whites score low in this
regard, non-whites high.
The fact is that non-whites are clamoring to enter this country in
droves. Whites are fleeing en masse to less densely inhabited areas to
escape these new arrivals.
8. Q. But how can Whites be exploited when it is whites who have
enacted these racial preferences, the taxation, the welfare payments
and the immigration laws?
A. Excellent question! It is true that Whites are exploited by their
fellow whites. In fact, we do not expect any resistance to the
formation of a separate nation from non-whites. We expect white
integrationist elites to resist. They are the ones who have a great
deal to lose.
9. Q. If life in America is so bad for Whites why don't you just move
back to Europe?
A. We are a majority. We do not have to move back. We can resolve to
defend ourselves against this onslaught. We have the option of
peacefully ceding lands already inhabited by non-whites to separate
non-white nations. We would save money, and could restore our civil
liberties and free ourselves from constant threats of violence by so
doing.
Besides, most of Europe has decided to follow the lead of the United
States and transform itself into a multi-racial hell hole, enforcing
the now official state religion of multi-culturalism with draconian
penalties against dissenting heretics. There is no longer any place
left for us to go!
10. Q. What would your separate state look like?
A. The truth is we don't know yet. Our separate state would follow the
geographic outlines of White flight. The model for this state would be
the modern gerrymander created by the Voting Rights Act to create
majority non-white congressional districts. We would simply cede these
to a separate nation. The mechanics of this process will be explained
more fully later in a post entitled "sweating the details."
11. Q. Would all Whites be welcome in your separate state?
A. Absolutely. There would be no restriction by country of origin, and
no genetic tests, skin color or hair color tests or any nonsense like
that. The only restriction would be that those who wish to recreate
the present system by importing non- whites and then encouraging their
hostility would not be welcome. They would have to remain in or move
to the lands ceded to the non-whites.
12. Q. Would Asians be welcome in your separate state?
A. Unresolved. As a general rule, Asian-Americans show very little
aggression towards Whites, either personally or politically. Thus,
there is no compelling reason to exclude them from our new state.
Further, it is probable that Asians will become political allies at
some point because they are almost certain to be viewed as a threat by
the existing Jewish- Black-Hispanic racial extortion coalition and be
subject to the same discriminatory burdens as we are.
Thus, our relations with Asian Americans are fluid and likely to be
shaped by the strategic choices of the racial extortion coalition. We
would anticipate that Asian Americans would maintain a strong
aesthetic preference for their own kind and might want to maintain
their own non-sovereign "nation" within our state, which would
generally be fine with us.
13. Q. Would the same hold true for hispanics.
A. The "hispanic race is an artificial grouping of peoples (cobbled
together by multi-culturalists in and attempt to enlarge the racial
extortion coalition) that includes many Whites of European origin,
including Spaniards, and Portugese, as well as many Cubans and Latin
Americans of European origin. Hispanics of European origin, as well as
those of mixed ancestry who consider themselves White, blend in and
display no hostility of a personal or political kind, would be part of
our White Nation. Those Hispanics with a history of participation in
the racial extortion coalition, and "Mecha" members who want to see
the Southwestern U.S. annexed to Mexico would not be welcome.
14. Q. You are proposing that inclusion and exclusion be based on
ideology and feelings. Won't your act of nation splitting turn into a
witch hunt?
A. For white liberals it is definitely going to feel like a witch
hunt! When the time comes, those who are guilty of "integrationism"
should do the sensible thing and flee. It will spare us all a lot of
pain.
15. Q. Is this White Nation something that you intend to pursue right
away?
A. No. The White Nation is, by most accounts, about 10-15 years off. When
the rest of the U.S. begins to look like Southern California it will
happen more or less automatically, without much of a push from us.
16. Q. Why do you use the term "European-American"?
A. All Whites are descended from European immigrants. The term
European-American has political significance for two reasons. First,
it recognizes that most people in the U.S. of European extraction have
intermarried to such an extent that it is no longer possible to
identify american Whites as "Irish" or "German" or "Italian". But more
important, use of the term "European-American" is intended to
recognize that white elites in the United States have exploited
differences based on religion and European national origin to divide
European-Americans, with the intention of rendering us unable to
defend ourselves against non-white demands.
17. Q. What is White separatism?
A. A White separatist will agree on most points with a White
Nationalist, except that he may not see a need to establish a separate
sovereign nation within the present territorial boundaries of the U.S.
18. Q. What is a White supremacist?
A. That is a White who wishes to subjugate other races by force,
ordinarily by military conquest. White supremacists are very rare in
now, and there is no visible trend or base of support which would
allow them to carry such a political program into effect. White
supremacists are generally an embarrassment to White Nationalists.
19. Q. Do White Nationalists think of Adolph Hitler or National
Socialism as a model to emulate?
A. White Nationalists do not seek to recreate the German experience of
1933-1945. Hitler's Reich is not a model for White Nationalism,
primarily because White Nationalists do not tolerate hostility and
aggression against fellow descendants of European Christendom based on
language or national origin. White Nationalism is defensive. It is not
externally aggressive. It would most likely be a government of very
limited powers, with a federal structure that assures localities
considerable latitude to experiment with moral and social laws, with
the idea of fostering traditional communities and traditional
religions in places where the overwhelming majority of people want
such things - and secularism where the majority wish to have that as
well.
However, within the ranks of White Nationalists, there are some
significant differences of opinion about the historical significance
of Hitler, and whether he was a help or a hindrance to the cause of
White survival. Also, there are those who argue that Hitler's military
exploits were a defensive reaction to the ethnically motivated
slaughters by (predominantly jewish) Marxists in Russia. This debate
among White Nationalists can get emotional at times, but has little to
do with the practicality of White survival or the probable
characteristics of any new White Nation today.
20. Q. Are White Nationalists anti-semitic.
A. Depends on how you define anti-semitism. A uniform and essential
characteristic of White Nationalism is opposition to Jewish power as
that power is now expressed in (A) the formation, financing and
direction of the racial extortion coalition, (B) the cultural attack
(and consequent degradation of our race) emanating from effective
Jewish control of the entertainment media and other organs of public
opinion, and (C) control of U.S. foreign policy and law enforcement
(the state monopoly on violence) and the use of that monopoly to
futher Jewish and Isreali interests.
At the same time, White Nationalists recognize that there are
individual Jews who do not participate in these expressions of Jewish
power nor approve of them, and must not be subjected to the same
measures as those who do.
One central agenda of White Nationalism is White autonomy (self-
determination), which will involve opposition to the exercise of
Jewish influence and control over the White population. Anyone who
considers himself Jewish but does not have a problem with
participating in such opposition is, by definition, not part of the
cooperating Jewish group and is welcome to join the White community
and work toward the achievement of our goals.
The problem is that the majority of Jews share an irrational fear of
the American Descendants of European Christendom (Steven Issacs, Jews
and American Politics) which refuses to scale itself in any reasonable
way to the nature of the actual threat and to their power to avert
that threat.
It is one thing for an impoverished and harrassed group to harbor such
distrust, but quite another for a fabulously wealthy and dominant
elite to do so. In fact, the wealthier and more powerful Jews become,
the more intense the discrimination and cultural attacks against us
become.
Although Jews are racially "white," the predominant Jewish
evolutionary psychology is qualitatively and quantitatively different
from that of the white gentiles who join them in supporting the multi-
culturalist enterprise, and who support the demands of the racial
extortion coalition. White gentiles who support these causes do so
largely for reasons of perceived individual self interest, the
acquisition of social status, and for the enjoyment of feelings of
moral superiority - all signs of a class that is complacent and
comfortable with the status quo. Thus, the behavior of most Jews will
be much more difficult to modify than the behavior their white gentile
allies.
Allowing Jews wildly disporportionate wealth and political power has
not moderated their suspicion nor their preemptive attack upon us.
Thus, rational "deals" with them will be almost impossible to broker.
21. Q. What is the difference between political conservatism and White
Nationalism?
A. White Nationalists generally diagnose the problems of the United
States in exactly the same way as do most conservatives. Indeed Thomas
Sowell's treatise on the universality of racial strife worldwide and
the tendency of governments worldwide to aggravate racial strife are
the factual raw material for the White Nationalist argument.
However, there are enormously important differences.
Conservatives generally believe that different races can live
peacefully in a single country as long as the government has limited
powers and serves as a "loose confederation" guaranteeing individual
rights. White Nationalists tend to have emotional sympathy toward this
conservative viewpoint.
However, White Nationalists will point out that there is no existing
example of such a loose confederation in which racial autonomy and
peace has been achieved, nor is there any reason to believe that a
government (such as the United States Government) which starts out as
a loose confederation with limited powers will remain so for long if
subjected to the competing demands of different races.
White Nationalists believe that the urge to use governmental power to
gain racial advantage is so great that the safest and most humane
choice is to break up multi-racial empires and place each race under a
separate government. In broad outline, the old Soviet Union headed in
the right direction in preventing racial and ethnic conflict by
splitting apart and allowing different races and ethnicities their own
separate governments.
Conservatives assume liberals are motivated by good intentions, and
that the destructiveness of their policies should be forgiven. White
nationalists believe that liberals are motivated by a lust for power
and carefully cloaked ethnic and cultural hatreds and that their
destructive social policies achieve their real (as opposed to their
stated) aims. Because our federal and most state governments are
dominated by liberals, those governments are illegitimate and the
people have the right of immediate rebellion.
White Nationalists, believe that liberal elites will never tolerate
the loss of power that comes from stripping down the U.S. Government
to its original conception of a loose confederation, and that liberals
would resort to any and all means including electoral fraud,
suspension of freedom of speech and of the press, warrantless arrests,
suspension of habeas corpus, inciting racial violence, and inciting
mass migrations into the United States to avoid any such loss of
power.
Most White Nationalists view our liberal elites as extremely
dangerous, - as vicious and manipulative in the use of police power as
they are cowardly in their personal lives. Most White Nationalists
also view the "Waco" incident not as an aberration, but as the
preferred response of liberals to dissident religious or anti-
egalitarian Whites, and are convinced that the result of this incident
represents the preferred outcome from the liberal perspective. It is
clear that liberal elites think of dissident religious or anti-
egalitarian Whites as, at best, a form of undesirable "property" that
they may dispose of as they wish.
Thus, conservatives basically accept the fundamental premises of the
secular religion of human equality and the brotherhood of man,
accepting the notion that states should act as coercive blenders.
Conservatives hope (against hope) that competing races are enough like
us that they can be persuaded by reason and rational argument to treat
us fairly while we are swirling in that blender.
White Nationalists, on the other hand, have been taught by careful
observation of humanity to reject the secular religion of human
equality and the brotherhood of man, and to recognize that the way to
maximize peace and to prevent racial oppression is not with
romaniticised visions of a single blended human race, but rather to
accord all men the basic human right of belonging to a separate nation
defined by the perfectly natural preference for genetic self
similarity. When this is done, it is possible to minimize racial
conflict through reason at the level on which reason has a chance of
working, namely at the level of diplomacy between racial nations.