by David Sims
Everyone understands that there are both good people and bad people in all races. Certainly, I’ve never said otherwise, even if at times I’ve referred to groups of people in general terms. But there are times when we must generalize.
Not every grain of sand in a pile of sand is tan, but most of it is, and tan is the color that you get an overall impression of, if you look at a pile of sand from a distance. Not every atom in a metal can of hot compressed air is moving faster or has more kinetic energy than does the average atom at room temperature, but most of the atoms in the can do, and if you try to pick up the can with your bare hands you will get burns and blisters.
Although evil exists among all peoples, it does not exist in all peoples in the same proportion. Some peoples are more evil than others. The differences aren’t entirely, or even primarily, the result of circumstances — a fact you can check by controlling for circumstances and verifying that the differences persist. Nor are the differences a minor matter of a few per cent. One people might exhibit a particular evil with double or triple the rate of another. And for some evils one people might display a rate that is two or three orders of magnitude (i.e., a factor of hundreds or of thousands of times) larger than that of another people.
How much will you pay to extract a few tiny grains of gold from the pile of sand they are hidden in? The effort might cost you more than the gold is worth. Or it might not. It all depends on the proportions of sand and gold, and on how much effort must be invested in separating them.
We are morally responsible, first, above all, bar nothing, to protect our genes as they occur in our own children, and then in the children of our race born to other families.
Our genes didn’t evolve to sacrifice themselves so that different genes could replace them: That kind of morality is improper (or unnatural) and its practice is evil (or “illegal” under the laws of Nature) — with extinction being the penalty.
We have been duped, mostly by the Jews, into behaving immorally, into sacrificing the prospects for the future survival of our race, of our descendants, so that the prospects of other races, especially those of the Jews, might be enlarged. The duping has been carried out with propaganda in television, newspapers, movies, and magazines, but a fair bit of it is also propagated via corrupted curricula in public schools. Although a certain number of lies are standard fare in all of these media, mostly the deceptions involve abuses of emphasis, abuses of omission, and abuses of psychology.
The abuse of emphasis is carried on by elevating social differences of opinion into major political issues, which our national lawmakers debate on TV with much apparent concern and gravity, spinning away the hours on a minor matter that could, and should, be handled in minutes, probably ending with the conclusion that government need not treat this particular matter at all, and that people can, and should, be left alone to decide for themselves how to live.
Meanwhile, the US Congress does not, most decidedly not, speak about whether or not to send weapons and money to Israel, or whether the US ambassador to the United Nations should use the US veto in the Security Council to block resolutions that the Jews don’t like. Such matters as these have already been decided by the Jews, you see, and it would be impertinent, not to mention dangerous, for any mere Congressman to meddle in their affairs.
One of the abuses of psychology is making the subject of history in high schools boring, filled with details that should be left for those seeking advanced degrees — whereas teaching it well, with a focus on what is important to our own lives, with reasonable completeness and accuracy, would shock most people and provoke fear, anger, and bitterness, and, in a few, resolve to make right what has gone wrong. But this the Jews do not allow. A history teacher in a public high school would probably lose his job if he tried to do it properly.