Friday, May 29, 2009

Anti-White Bias: Ignoring Voter Intimidation

Updated 2009-05-31 (below original post).

Here's a typical example of the anti-White bias of our "civil society" as well as the increasingly brazen corruption of the Obama administration.

From the Washington Times: (emphasis mine)

Justice Department political appointees overruled career lawyers and ended a civil complaint accusing three members of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense of wielding a nightstick and intimidating voters at a Philadelphia polling place last Election Day, according to documents and interviews.

The incident - which gained national attention when it was captured on videotape and distributed on YouTube - had prompted the government to sue the men, saying they violated the 1965 Voting Rights Act by scaring would-be voters with the weapon, racial slurs and military-style uniforms.

Career lawyers pursued the case for months, including obtaining an affidavit from a prominent 1960s civil rights activist who witnessed the confrontation and described it as "the most blatant form of voter intimidation" that he had seen, even during the voting rights crisis in Mississippi a half-century ago.

The lawyers also had ascertained that one of the three men had gained access to the polling place by securing a credential as a Democratic poll watcher, according to interviews and documents reviewed by The Washington Times.

The career Justice lawyers were on the verge of securing sanctions against the men earlier this month when their superiors ordered them to reverse course, according to interviews and documents. The court had already entered a default judgment against the men on April 20.


To support its evidence, the government had secured an affidavit from Bartle Bull, a longtime civil rights activist and former aide to Sen. Robert F. Kennedy's 1968 presidential campaign. Mr. Bull said in a sworn statement dated April 7 that he was serving in November as a credentialed poll watcher in Philadelphia when he saw the three uniformed Panthers confront and intimidate voters with a nightstick.

Inexplicably, the government did not enter the affidavit in the court case, according to the files.

"In my opinion, the men created an intimidating presence at the entrance to a poll," he declared. "In all my experience in politics, in civil rights litigation and in my efforts in the 1960s to secure the right to vote in Mississippi ... I have never encountered or heard of another instance in the United States where armed and uniformed men blocked the entrance to a polling location."

Mr. Bull said the "clear purpose" of what the Panthers were doing was to "intimidate voters with whom they did not agree." He also said he overheard one of the men tell a white poll watcher: "You are about to be ruled by the black man, cracker."

He called their conduct an "outrageous affront to American democracy and the rights of voters to participate in an election without fear." He said it was a "racially motivated effort to limit both poll watchers aiding voters, as well as voters with whom the men did not agree."

The Washington Times has a good editorial discussing this case:
Protecting Black Panthers: The Obama administration ignores voter intimidation

The simple identity interchange test of double standards clearly proves this is yet another example of anti-White bias so beloved by our "civil society". If White men had been outside a polling station dressed like the defendents, intimidating Black voters and using language like "You are about to be ruled by the white man, nigger", then our "civil society", including the media, academia and the government, especially the Department of Justice, would've gone ballistic and almost certainly those White men would've been prosecuted to a felony conviction, including hate crimes, and would've served jail time. If the prosecution had failed, they would've found some "civil rights" law trick to overturn the explicit Fifth Amendment right of protection against double jeopardy, until they got their White men.

But naturally, if Blacks are the aggressors and Whites the victims, then the rules change. If Sonia Sotomayor is appointed to the Supreme Court, no doubt she'll happily enshrine just these sort of double standards as precedents in "CON-stitutional Law".

Yeah, we get it. F*** Whitey and f*** the color-blind society!

In looking through Google News, the only mainstream media hits are for the Washington Times, which broke the story, and Fox News, the neoconservative-dominated network. The rest of the hits are for some conservative web sites. The MSM has no problem quickly covering emerging stories that adhere to their preferred, politically correct narrative, but obviously they're reluctant to give this story oxygen, especially when the Obama administration is already busy engaging in obvious corruption, like screwing over the Chrysler bondholders by ignoring established bankruptcy law, only closing Chrylser dealers that were Republican donors, pressuring California to bow to SEIU demands or lose federal stimulus money, the bailouts and their unaccountability, porkulus money for favored clients like ACORN, the education ripoff complex, etc, etc, etc.

It will be interesting to see if the MSM gets around to covering this story over the next few days or if they try to squelch it like most other politically incorrect stories.

A unidentified lady at the Constitutional Convention in 1787:
“Well, Doctor, what have we got—a Republic or a Monarchy?”

Benjamin Franklin:
“A Republic, if you can keep it.”

We lost it.

Zimbabwe and South Africa, here we come!

Yes We Can!

UPDATE: 2009-05-31

Two days after my original post only ONE additional MSM article has appeared in Google News: this CNN story:

Let's see how the "professionals" at CNN cover the story:

May 28, 2009
Justice Department drops charges in voter intimidation case
Posted: 07:00 PM ET

From CNN Senior Producer Kevin Bohn

WASHINGTON (CNN) – The Justice Department is dropping charges against the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense and two of its members who were allegedly involved in voter intimidation on Election Day at a Philadelphia, Pennsylvania polling station.

A Justice spokesman said the department decided to take this action after winning an injunction earlier this month against a third member, Samir Shabazz, that prevents him from ever brandishing a weapon outside a polling place again as he was charged with doing last November.

Shabazz was one of the three persons, along with the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense, charged with voter intimidation last January in a lawsuit filed under the Voting Rights Act. Shabazz will not face any jail time or a fine.

“Claims were dismissed against the other defendants based on a careful assessment of the facts and the law,” DOJ spokesman Alejandro Miyar said in a statement. “The Department is committed to the vigorous prosecution of those who intimidate, threaten or coerce anyone exercising his or her sacred right to vote.”

On Election Day, two men in uniforms stood outside the polling station with one of them holding a police-style baton weapon and saying he was providing security there. Justice has alleged that person was Shabazz.

In January, Justice said in a criminal complaint that the chairman of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense confirmed its members were stationed at that location as part of a nationwide effort to deploy people at polling stations.

The Justice Department says The New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense is distinct from the well-known Black Panther Party of the 1960's.

UPDATE: Malik Shabaaz, chairman of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense, told CNN Friday that Samir Shabaaz is no longer a member of the organization, and that his organization does not support voter intimidation.

"We want to thank President Obama and his administration for dropping charges against us that were vindictively brought by the Bush administration," Malik Shabaaz told CNN. "We don't condone any type of illegal activity at polling stations."

Shabaaz said the members in Pennsylvania were not acting under the direction of the national party.

(Updated at 4:30 p.m. on Friday, May 29 with New Black Panther Party response)

Notice that this story completely ignored the affidavit given by Bartle Bull and it completely ignores the explicity anti-White racial facet of the incident. Even if CNN didn't know this aspect of the story when it was first published on the 28th, which is extremely doubtful, it certainly knew about it after the Washington Times published their detailed article on the 29th well before this story was updated at 4:30pm on the 29th, which was used to further undermine the real issue by quoting a New Black Panther Party leader acting as if the entire incident was some sort of illegitimate persecution of their poor, innocent selves.

Notice how this article frames the story as if Justice Department had won some great victory in "winning an injunction ... that prevents him from ever [sic, according to Washington Times story] brandishing a weapon outside a polling place again ...".

Then the DOJ spokesmen is given the floor so he can TELL us that "The Department is committed to the vigorous prosecution of those who intimidate, threaten or coerce anyone exercising his or her sacred right to vote.". Hahahahaha!!! More bulls*** constructed reality! That is exactly what they are NOT doing by treating this serious attack against our supposed civil society so lightly BECAUSE Black activists were culpable. The critical point: would they have behaved the same if the identities were interchanged between Black and White? Answer: No way!!!

This is just business as usual for our corrupt, worthless and elite-and-corporate-interest-controlled MSM.

Hopefully "change we can believe in" is coming soon.

Wednesday, May 13, 2009

White Advocacy: Ideas for Alternative Media

One major force brainwashing most Whites against thinking and acting ethnocentrically is the mainstream media (MSM), which includes newspapers, magazines, TV, radio and their internet outposts. Like all of our "civil society" institutions, the MSM constantly treats the smallest assertion of White identity or ethnocentrism as racism or supremacism while hypocritically supporting much stronger racial identity and ethnocentrism among ALL non-White groups. This was an important factor in my realizing that the left is not really "celebrating" other groups so much as despising Whites.

So one important strategy for White advocates is to subvert, replace or neutralize the impact of these various anti-White institutions. Essentially we're in a deep hole and, barring some unforeseen catastrophic event, it will take many years, much effort and much better organization to dig ourselves out.

Regardless of the many possible futures of the US, Whites must fight against the pervasive anti-White double standards that currently dominate our "civil society". Hopefully our system will be open to reform, and it is even possible that a fair, color-blind society could be recovered where Whites' ethnic interests, identity, peoplehood and survival are treated with the same respect as other groups, but unfortunately, we're on a radically different course and have been for decades.

Some Causes of the Mainstream Media's Anti-White Bias

The MSM are dominated by corporate interests, White guilt, multiculturalism, political correctness and disproportionate Jewish influence, among others. Part of this anti-White environment is propagated because the left has gradually taken control of our "civil society" over the last fifty years, so they're able to strongly influence many facets of our culture and society, including co-opting many of our cognitive elites, which further strengthens the forces for the left.

The left has changed the rules by first claiming to create a color-blind society, but then heaping contempt on color-blindness in favor of excoriating Whites and their supposed "White Privilege" and explicitly rejecting the color-blind ideal. This, among other evidence, demonstrates their bad faith and animosity to Whites. Of course many on the left probably don't interpret the evidence this way, so part of our advocacy must be to grapple with the various leftist arguments and values in their strongest, most cogent forms, to be able to rebut them, so we can recapture some of our lost brethren and reduce the losses of our cognitive elites in the various cauldrons of leftist indoctrination. I plan to explore this issue in a future post. It's also important to understand the psychology and motivations that drive leftists and how this manifests in their activism and behavior.

While the left obsesses over equality of outcome between Whites and NAMs (non-Asian minorities), and insists upon coercive law to create an unnatural parity, I've never seen the slightest concern on their part to level disparities between Whites and Jews, which are about as large, or between Jews and NAMs, which are truly massive, or between Asians and NAMs, or all the various intra-group disparities. If the left is truly concerned with disparate outcomes, why do they focus upon one particular dispartity instead of considering the full set of disparities? Of course, if they confronted the existence of these many disparities, they would have to seriously question their belief that the primary cause of the Black-White disparity is anti-Black racism and discrimination by Whites.

Pressures on Existing Mainstream Media

Fortunately several forms of media are struggling financially, primarily from the emergence of the internet, which radically changes the possibilities and economics of information dissemination as well as increasingly draining the advertising that most media channels rely on to fund their operations. Stories seemingly appear daily lamenting the tribulations of the third estate. Yeehah!

The media frequently pushes diversity, multiculturalism, anti-White rhetoric, White guilt and politically correct lies, and it suppresses "hate facts", contrary stories or dissenting views of the diversity party line. They particularly favor hiding non-White crime against Whites, including some shockingly brutal atrocities, like the Knoxville Horror, the Witchita Massacre or the killing of the White Polish-American Marine Sgt. Janek "Jan" Pawel Pietrzak and his Black wife, Quiana Jenkins-Pietrzak, by four Black Marines, including two of Sgt. Pietrzak's underlings.

An analysis of Google or Google News stories discussing Sgt. Pietrzak demonstrate that many of the modest portion of the MSM that covered the story, obscured the fact that all four of the killers were Black. Look at how sparse the Google News coverage is over the last month even though new court testimony is currently ongoing. Google News only shows one non-local, English language newspaper covering the story, The New York Daily News, and they don't mention in this story that the four killers were Black, although they had been one of the few MSM outlets to do so previously.

Our MSM masters insult our intelligence by not even mentioning the possibility that maybe, just maybe, there is a racial angle to the killing. This ABC News link contains NO mention of the racial angle and the embedded video also refuses to articulate any possibility of a racial motive, preferring to blather on about the mysterious motive that will probably be forever unknown. It's only tribute to the possibility of a racial angle was their showing the mug shots of all four suspects which demonstrates they were all Black. What the ABC News video actually does is use coded language that might sail over the heads of some average or below-average people who might interpret their language literally, while conveying a subtext that implies a racial motive is present, particularly through their grandiose evasions and subtle clues in framing the story including the images shown and the background details about the couple, but by explicitly refusing to articulate this, they're demonstrating the power of political correctness to enforce a grossly dishonest interpretation of reality in spite of our "lying eyes". Ultimately it's an exercise in raw power to condition the viewers to recognize and submit to the officially approved limits of allowed speech and thoughts in our increasingly totalitarian society.

This is a classic illustration of Theodore Dalrymple's observation:
Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, nor to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is to co-operate with evil, and in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.

We're supposed to believe that the killers savagely killed Mr. and Mrs. Pietrzak, including rape and sexual abuse of his wife, for a simple robbery. Even worse a CNN transcript of a show from the day before most of the initial stories were published demonstrates that the full details of the story were common knowledge, and presumably all the MSM reporters basically knew the same facts, yet they deliberately chose to hide many of these important details. Note that a few newspapers did report the fact that the four killers were Black, but many deliberately left this out, along with other details indicating the gratuitious violence, rape and racist graffiti.

Also, the authorities are guilty in this little charade, since if it had been a Black sergeant and his White wife savagely killed and raped by four White underlings with racist graffiti at the crime scene, they definitely would've pushed for any applicable hate crimes, under massive pressure from a firestorm of international media coverage and howls of outrage by the Black "leadership" gang of Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, the NAACP, among others, and, oh yeah, the press and the rest of our "civil society" would INSTANTLY call it a horrible hate crime. There would likely be many statements released by legions of academic activists denouncing the brutal White racism gripping America and hundreds of candlelight vigils would be held across the county with guilt-drenched SWPLs denouncing their Whiteness (really meaning all those non-enlightened troglodyte White masses). Yet for the Pietrzak family slaughter, the MSM don't dare mention the term hate crime (same for the prosecutors up to this point that I've seen). Hate crime? Nah, it's just a robbery gone wrong.

I personally think hate crime law is a travesty and should be completely scrapped in favor of only enforcing the law based on the criminal's actions without trying to puzzle out whether politically incorrect throughts were motivating the criminal, but given the existence of hate crimes, they should be applied objectively, uniformly and fairly. Obviously in this case and several other notable cases, horrific hate crimes have been committed against Whites with absolute silence from our worthless "civil society". The easy test for double standards is whether people think or act differently when identities are interchanged as I illustrated above.

The media is losing credibility because of their blatant political correctness and dishonesty in hiding and obscuring Black and immigrant crime, among other taboos. "Coincidentally", the big and little lies they push also benefit globalist, corporate interests and a small, wealthly elite, while marginalizing non-elite Whites and the middle and working classes in general. Blacks are and will be hurt more in the future by massive third world immigration, but their "leadership" doesn't care.

The government is also losing credibilty with their handling of this case. These sorts of double standards are exactly why I've given up on the color-blind society and realized it's a huge con game with Whites as total chumps (and I don't think I'm alone in making this conclusion).

Although this media bias hasn't gone unnoticed, and even though many average people might feel uneasy about the media, they don't have any viable alternatives, since even "conservative" media is really mostly neoconservative and in thrall to corporate interests, which also supports much of the politically correct, multicultural agenda, including massive legal immigration and amnesty.

The rise in cynicism and the loss of credibility coupled with the technological possibilities of the internet provide an opportunity for serious alternatives to arise.

Closely related is the development of alternative cultural production and the arts which I'll consider in a separate post.

First I'll lay out some reasons why a diverse alternative media that begins reaching a wider audience seems inevitable, and after considering the specific alternative channels, I'll consider other facets of alternative mass media. America has had a variety of alternative media channels for many decades. In the realm of newspapers and magazines, a wide variety of relatively low circulation offerings have probably been available stretching back to the founding of our republic and certainly many niche publications covering the full political spectrum from far-right to far-left have been available throughout the 20th century.

The internet has enabled a wider audience to see alternative perspectives with very little effort or cost to the consumer, while many of the traditional media costs, like printing and mailing have been eliminated for internet publications. Not surprisingly, many new internet-only publications have sprung up reaching much larger audiences than were previously possible.

Basically I believe it will soon be possible for a variety of alternative viewpoints to begin reaching a much wider audience than previously possible because technological changes will let mass consumers easily bypass the current corporate-controlled distribution channels, like TV cable networks or limited radio channels, using internet-based devices. It will be interesting to see how the established media react to the onslaught of competition from so many diverse sources, including various ethnic advocates, the full spectrum of political beliefs from far left to far right, quirky subcultures and bands of amateur individuals, among others.

Let's now consider some specific media.

Alternative Magazines

Alternative magazines are probably the most successful form of alternative media with the widest current readership. They've blossomed in the internet era as the quintessential example of how internet technologies make it much cheaper to produce and distribute content, enabling an end run around corporate control mechanisms, like limited exposure through bookstores, magazine stands, etc. By using various open-source products and tools, including sophisticated content management systems, attractive, powerful and professional sites can be developed very inexpensively. As new web technologies are developed, web savvy activists can stay right at cutting edge.

Magazines are typically distinguished from newspapers in being delivered on a weekly or monthly basis instead of daily and including more analysis and background rather than raw news coverage. But this distinction seems be eroding somewhat as most online magazines have daily online content that supplements their traditional periodical content.

A few good examples are VDARE, Taki's Magazine and I trust VDARE on immigration and other topics far more than any MSM source. Taki's Magazine is an internet-only magazine offering a traditional or paleoconservative perspective that has been pushed out of the entire MSM by liberals and neoconservatives with very few exceptions like Pat Buchanan, who probably has to mask his real views at least a little to avoid losing his media role. Many of us who imbibed the neoconservative party line from National Review, the Weekly Standard, Fox News or Rush Limbaugh, now realize there is a much wider universe thanks to the alternative media available mostly through the internet. Likewise gives a critique of American imperial and war policies rarely seen in the MSM.

There are hundreds and even thousands of additional sites covering the full spectrum politically and focusing on different target audiences and subject areas. A goal of White advocates is to support existing White-friendly sites while creating and supporting more. When I say White-friendly, I mean it probably doesn't push White advocacy hard, but rather completely rejects the typical anti-White assumptions of the MSM and includes positive views of Whites, probably mostly implicitly, is open to questioning all the current sacred cows and provides a more respectful view of White advocates, among a wide range of voices. Separate media outlets might take up White advocacy more directly. The goal is to encourage an open, honest dialogue and fair treatment.

Part of the propaganda war against Whites is accomplished through subtle (and not-so-subtle) injections of anti-White digs into stories concerned with other matters. We can use the same techniques in the media we control and influence. This should be particularly effective in other domains, like cultural production. So, for example, other topics, like family, parenting, cooking, lifestyle, travel, cultural, educational and many other subjects can be developed that support subtle, non-overbearing White-friendly rhetoric. The goal is to displace a noticeable portion of the audience currently given to corporate media that nearly universally pushes political correctness, multiculturalism and anti-White subtexts. Some of these new media can even be financially self-supporting or lucrative through revenue streams currently going to anti-White corporations. Others may run mostly on volunteer labor with charitable donations or White-friendly foundations supporting the core costs. One approach might be to create more regional and community content to build local participation and identity instead of our current phony top-down, leveled, national culture driven by the manipulative values of our elites and corporations desiring good, little consumers buying lots of crap they mostly don't need.

An excellent project would be to create a White-friendly current events magazine that competes with Time, Newsweek and US News and World Report while keeping the costs much more contained through mostly web operation and skillful use of volunteer labor and organization. Hopefully it could eventually be reasonably self-supporting and synergize with a network of White-friendly companies, organizations and other media allies. Many of the skills used to create professional alternative media have market value, so volunteer labor can also gain valuable experience, skill enhancement and networking to further the volunteer's career while fulfilling activist passions.

Another approach is to aggregate content from several existing alternative magazines to create a higher-reach virtual magazine. This can also act as advertising for the original publications by making more readers aware of the different specific sites. A related concept is to create a Reader's-Digest-like magazine that simplifies and highlights the most important points both for time-limited readers and average readers with non-elite literacy skills. Imagine providing Steve Sailor summaries accessible to the everyday folks along with their ability to navigate to additional detail if they need convince their peers of the substance of the points. An important goal is to enable both our elites and average citizens learn to rebut the left's arguments and rhetoric through facts, logic and our own rhetorical techniques for offense and defense. This is an important part to trying to salvage our "civil society" by opposing and ultimately reversing its current anti-White bias.

I believe that print-on-demand technology, e.g. at an airport booth, will make it feasible to create inexpensive hardcopy magazines for those wanting to read physical media while cutting out pretty much all of the traditional costs and complexities of physical distribution. But many consumers won't bother with reading physical media when they can directly read the content over the web, including the proliferation of flexible new devices. Imagine an Amazon Kindle-like device with another two or three generations of development where you have high-quality color screens that look like paper where you're wired into the internet to follow links, look up unknown words, automatically delve into greater detail for topics discussed in articles, etc. And new magazine content can be automatically retrieved if the user chooses.

Even better, some of these devices will likely enable a full range of media viewing, including magazines, newspapers, audio, radio and TV, as well as sophisticated information management tools. A major goal is for White advocates to be on the cutting edge in developing and exploiting these many changes both to benefit economically as well as spreading our message.

Alternative Newspapers

As mentioned earlier newspapers are under particular market pressure for many reasons including the loss of subscribers as many consumers shift to internet for their daily news, while their primary sources of advertising revenue, including classified ads, are transferred to other channels, like the internet and direct mail. And, as previously discussed, a fair number of people are aware that newspapers are not providing the full story for many important issues, are beset by political correctness and multicultural ideology, and that most are owned by a handful of corporations closely interconnected to our ruling elites, but there aren't too many alternatives.

Most newspapers rely on a few news services, like the Associated Press or Reuters, to provide much of their national and international coverage and pretty much all of these services are aligned with the globalist, multicultural elites. Many of the European news services are closely tied to the state elites, commonly receiving government financing and various monopolistic advantages, and it clearly shows in their coverage.

Even much of the traditional alternative press, which is normally somewhat liberal or leftist, is being bought by corporations to target their predominantly SWPL readers. Some local, alternative conservative newspapers also exist, for example, publishing weekly.

A critical way to gain credibility is to exploit the dishonesty of the current media by bolding covering the stories suppressed by the MSM, particularly politically incorrect crime. The public craves accurate and honest information but the current elites don't want to provide it because it directly conflicts with their goal of radically transforming our country demographically and politically, meaning their plans are directly against the interests of most of the native population, but they don't want the chumps to understand this. Imagine sites that keep reliable and detailed statistics and stories regarding politically incorrect local crimes and other attempted official malfeasance, like when police in some large cities try to keep crime statistics down by discouraging victims from filing crime reports. If the general public knew there were reporters and activists committed to fighting this official corruption, it would be much harder for the elites to continue their current con game, because sympathetic sources, including those within our institutions, would know they'd have trustworthy reporters to inform.

Unless the elites try to create a totalitarian state, they will be unable to stop the free flow of information. If they do try to create the totalitarian state, they will likely find they've gone to far and have caused a major rebellion against their usurpations, at least if they try within the next decade or two.

It is vital that we create some White-friendly newspapers, including many local ones and at least a few national and international ones. A service can be created by pooling together the resources of many local actors with some national and international resources supported by the many local papers and other organizations, foundations and donors who value these alternatives. Many of the national and international resources can actually be part of an international network of people cooperating to provide wide coverage while mostly using local resources in each case. For example, hundreds and even thousands of European volunteers and advocates could provide substantial coverage throughout Europe for worldwide audiences, just like thousands of American workers can provide American coverage for European audiences as well as Americans. Some of this already exists on the internet, but it hasn't been organized to synergize into effective national and international networks.

Many of the local newspapers can start by supplementing existing local newspapers. So instead of attempting comprehensive local coverage, they can start by focusing on those stories normally supressed by corporate media. They can also act as critics of the local papers by demonstrating the various devious and dishonest ways that stories and events are censored and slanted by corporate media. They can also provide truly free speech related to local issues, unlike many existing newspapers which censor many politically incorrect comments. I believe a better approach than censorship is to provide various tools that allow people to filter out intellectual sabateurs without actually suppressing free speech. For example, in an open forum, some people might try to disrupt honest argumentation by creating many nuisance posts. Eventually such commenters will lose their credibility with most readers who will ignore anything they say. I believe tools could be built that would allow full freedom of speech while empowering users and groups of users to overcome those who essentially argue in bad faith and detract from useful discussions. Other tools could also help in supporting or rebutting arguments by pointing to more detailed arguments and evidence. The goal is to encourage honest, open-minded and thoughtful consideration of many different perspectives to try to come up with the truth and the best policies. I plan to discuss this more in a separate post.

Much of this work can be done purely using the internet and various low-cost or free content management tools. Guides can be created to help intelligent average citizens act as effective fact checkers, researchers, reporters, writers and editors. I also suspect that many older, retired citizens who are deeply concerned about the direction and future of our country will volunteer, and since they are retired, they are less able to be intimidated for fear of their future career. So ultimately much less money would be needed because we could harness more activist and volunteer labor and we would not be so concerned about making money. The more success this media achieves, the more volunteers, donors and supporters it will attract. Parts of the media could also pursue various media-related revenue streams which would both empower themselves while denying those resources to the anti-White corporate media.

One way local volunteers and workers, in many cases relative amateurs, can act as effective reporters is to get out and do much of the tedious legwork that is a vital part of genuine reporting. That involves attending various official or community meetings, talking with many different people within the community, pooling and analyzing local information, much like an intelligence gathering operation, analyzing various official and legal records, building relationships with various power brokers, bureaucrats, elites and average workers within many different organizations, and assertively using laws like the Freedom of Information Act to compel the authorities to provide information in the public interest. Evasive or deceptive behavior by authorities can be exposed to create public pressure for keeping them honest. As these movements gain more credibility, it will be much easier for sympathetic or self-interested members of institutions like government, corporations, organizations, etc, to act as sources, including anonymous whistle blowers. Obviously great care must be taken when working with anonymous sources who sometimes have selfish interests for selectively leaking some information or disinformation. Alternative newspapers and news services can have a public web page with different ways to contact reporters to provide information, providing tips on internet anonymity, uploading documents securely over the web, phone calls, personal meetings and even clock-and-dagger techniques for the extremely cautious, like Deep Throat used during Watergate. Also, as they gain prominance, officials will be forced to give these reporters the same rights they given to other professional reporters.

By focusing on honesty, accuracy, objectivity, fairness and long-term credibility, trust can be built up among Whites and non-Whites alike. The core of White advocacy to me is that Whites are merely arguing for simple fairness so that they are treated no worse or better than any other group and that we can pursue our interests just as much as other groups are allowed and encouraged to. White Advocacy to me is about being pro-White rather than anti-Black or anti-Jewish. Sure, some parts of other communities sometimes do things we consider anti-White and we'll criticize them for that, just as it would be reasonable for members of other communities to criticize Whites if they believe Whites have behaved unfairly, like various historical injustices Whites have committed against Blacks, Native Americans or Jews that needed to be rectified and atoned for. Ultimately, we need to look to the future and try to build a positive, healthy and fair society, and I think free speech, inquiry and debate are critical tools to achieving that.

A major goal for much of this new alternative media is to be White-friendly so that our perspectives, beliefs and arguments are treated with the respect, objectivity and fairness they rarely receive in any MSM. Critical scrutiny would also be applied to current sacred cows whose misdeeds are currently shielded by the MSM. The overriding goal is to overturn the current political correctness and de facto censorship that help to deeply corrupt our "civil society" and to reach out to our currently brainwashed average citizens and cognitive elites. Although there would likely be many different niches within the White advocacy ecosystem, I think this relatively moderate one is the most important because it can help the most in deprogramming large numbers of our people and breaking the political correctness stifling much of public conversation.

Print-on-demand stations that rapidly print magazines or newspapers in airports or news kiosks, can be exploited. For example, if a customer knows they're going to go by a certain kiosk, they can order their desired product and prepay for it using standard online payment systems so they'll be assured of not having any significant wait. There might even be a fully automated disbursement system where they enter a purchase code and it automatically dispenses their order with no human intervention. They can choose which stories to include in the printout based on their interests. So each person may get the parts that most interest them. Perhaps it typically takes 20 or 30 seconds to print out a typical custom newspaper (it probably won't have the huge volume of ads that current ones do) and by preordering they can avoid any delays from competing customers. Although the printers would probably be designed so that customers rarely have to wait longer than three minutes under most circumstances even if they walk up. Of course within a few years you'll be able to have your mobile device detect your location and automatically show you local kiosks and their availability and let you quickly make your desired order. This shows how current magazine and newspaper distribution could be radically changed for those demanding paper copies.

But probably most people would dump paper altogether and just read the content over the web or on new-and-improved devices, as discussed above for magazines.

Alternative TV

TV is the critical media for reaching our average citizens. Many average and below-average people don't read all that much but watch plenty of TV. This is a crucial media that must be challenged both for news and for culture production, which I plan to discuss separately. TV can also be valuable for our cognitive elites, with high-quality, thoughtful and articulate programs being an important niche we must cover, i.e. a PBS alternative.

Imagine brutally honest documentaries done with professional graphics and reporters intelligible to average TV viewers directly confronting topics like Non-Asian Minority crime or immigration and how various elites benefit from deceiving the general public about these problems. I think within a year or two such shows would capture significant market attention, even if it was secret guilty pleasure of borderline SWPLs. Imagine frequent, vivid illustrations of how our country is being colonized and transformed into an alien land, which normally Hollywood and the MSM love to hide while propagandizing us with warm little lies. Imagine an investigative news magazine that targets Hollywood, the MSM, corporations, the refugee industry, and the full universe of our politically correct, multicultural and leftist enforcers. Imagine talk shows with experts like Peter Brimelow, Steve Sailor and Jared Taylor instead of the usual liberals and neocons. Of course I'm all in favor of useful debates between a wide range of people including leftists, liberals, various non-White advocates, neocons, moderates and others. The problem is that paleoconservatives, race realists and other perspectives have been almost entirely excluded from MSM exposure and the exposure they typically get has negative framing.

Pretty much all the news programs produced today like morning, noon, nightly and late night news as well as actual breaking news and special events could be covered. Also the full range of support and analysis, like talk shows, interviews, documentaries, debates, group discussions and many others. We should be open to emerging and innovative formats, especially those exploiting new technological possibilities that encourage wider community participation. Various technologies like voice masking could be used to encourage participation in controversial subjects while political correctness still reigns.

The critical innovation will be a new generation of devices that will allow TV sets to connect to the internet and download content, essentially bypassing our current satellite, cable and broadcast channels. These have revolutionary potential to break the corporate control currently applied to all of these capital-intensive or physically constrained distribution channels. So new virtual networks and stations can be created that anyone can "tune into" over the internet. If people like what they see, they will explore other offerings on these channels and related media, and they will recommend these channels to their friends and family.

The new devices can be based on open standards and even open-source software with new features being added periodically. They would have disk storage and act like a DVR where they can hold store shows, perhaps even hundreds or thousands of shows before they run out of space. They might very easily allow extra storage like external hard disks to be added that can boost the available storage. They might even allow customers to use and support peer-to-peer networking so the users can donate some of their internet bandwidth, particularly when they're not using it, and some small portion of their storage to hosting general content, so that there no central server is needed to host the content. Instead the general public can mostly use each others' storage devices to retrieve the shows, which makes media distribution time and cost much lower for content creators. Peer-to-peer technologies can also have very high-performance. Based on upcoming internet improvements, many people will probably be able to watch high-definition TV shows, including news, with at most a short delay to cache a little data to improve the quality of the performance. But people could also automatically download the shows they know they want to see so they can watch without having to worry about network problems disrupting the show.

Even slow network connections would be able to download shows of interest with high quality, it would just take more time, so they would wait to watch the show until after it is fully or nearly downloaded. Like DVRs the devices would be able to both download new content while playing currently stored content. The software could make it easy to create disks to store the shows to share with others who may not have internet access or for archiving. These devices could have reasonably intuitive on-screen menus and help to make them easy for average users. Since they're hooked to the internet, they could download audiovisual help that explains the devices, or allow users to browse help forums on their TV looking for help with their problems or to post a question. The device could probably enable full blown web surfing and other information services and tools as well as TV, especially now that most TVs will be high-definition. Some new internet-TV synergies may be possible, allowing the TV content to be playing in part of the screen while enabling other tools to work next to that. For example, the user may make text or audio notes that comment on the TV show, perhaps to investigate or clarify some point. Friends or virtual communities could interact while watching a show together or a user could create comments and questions for other members of a virtual community synchronized with different parts of a show. One use of the capability would be for activists to critique and analyze existing shows to help create guides debunking MSM propaganda and manipulation.

The tools to create news programs and documentaries, like cameras and editing equipment are much cheaper than historically, so low-cost equipment can be used to create professional-looking shows. Ideas, techniques and software can be shared and developed by this network of local channels, further lowering costs and improving effectiveness.

So given the possibilities of this new technical infrastructure, we want to create a White-friendly alternative media just like for the magazine and newspaper segments. In fact many of the same people can contribute across these different media, for example, doing research and journalistic leg work, and the different organizations can closely collaborate and cross-promote one another. Again, local people can start by covering the set of local stories that are currently suppressed and heavily slanted to build up market credibility. These various local virtual channels can pool their efforts with other local channels to create virtual national channels, perhaps with a small dedicated national or international staff.

As far as advertising, among other possibilities, we can promote local manufacturers, businesses, organizations and individuals that are committed to strengthening local communities and American workers instead of offshoring, outsourcing and insourcing foreign workers like so many amoral, traitorous corporations. Ideally we'd create some alternate retail channels that supply American products made by real Americans. I'll explore those ideas in a separate post. Funding could include donations from appreciative audiences. Using the internet many small donations would go far in helping these enterprises stay solvent. For example, viewers could become sponsors of a yearly series by paying $10, or if they particularly like a show, they can give a $5 donation. They could buy moderately priced disk sets for their personal use or to give as gifts.

One interesting application would be to capture an MSM news show, like the nightly news and then wrap critical content around it so that average people can see where the corporate media is trying to manipulate and deceive them. This can be linked to proof, like detailed documents and stories that elaborate on this for those that want to verify the accuracy of the critiques. This approach can be applied to any TV production, including cultural production, documentaries, public debate, government meetings, etc.

These media can tie into partners in other media, like web sites, magazines, newspapers, radio, organizations, etc. One goal within White advocacy is to create broad networks that collaborate and synergize.

If a network became large and professional enough, it might eventually be hosted by traditional cable or satellite systems. The network could also be something of a grab bag that has a wide-range of shows, particularly early on when less content is being produced.

Alternative Radio

New communication technologies will make inexpensive audio feeds through the internet or personal mobile devices possible so that traditional radio can be supplemented or displaced, just like TV. The main goal is to make it extremely easy and convenient for average people. The same points made for other media pretty much apply to radio as well.

General Strategy of Alternative Media

It is likely that as alternative media becomes more successful, the MSM will feel pressured to be more honest in their coverage of issues, since they'll have been embarrassed by the detailed exposure and critiques they will suffer. This would be good since it would demonstrate success in improving our "civil society" to be more honest and less anti-White.

Since our highest goals are not making money and serving our corporate masters, we can be free to pursue any innovations that emerge, even if they don't bring in revenue. It is likely that many new possiblities will arise in the future, some of which will likely have revenue potential.

A wide range of content targeted to different audiences should eventually be produced. For example we need to target average, above average and exceptional people. Other demographic segments should also be targeted like different age groups, both sexes, different subcultures, including blue collar workers, small businessmen, professionals, government, law enforcement and military, non-White groups, and even artsy, SWPL-types and committed leftists. Different segments may be reachable to some degree by packaging the message differently. In fact constructive relations with non-Whites can be enhanced when they hear an open and honest hearing of White advocacy which I see as pro-White but not anti-non-White, other than our desire to stop further non-White colonization of our country which will upset the ethnic balance of the nation and likely ultimately lead to serious societal problems if not checked. If Whites behave badly, they should be chided and likewise if non-Whites behave badly, they should also be held accountable. A major problem with our current "civil society" is its intentional rejection of a simple, fair standard like this in favor of anti-White ideology.

Although my personal preference is for scrupulously honest reporting and analysis, logically we'd want to have the full spectrum of voices, including those that directly confront various strategems and dirty fighting of the left without being constrained by slavish adherence to the Marquess of Queensberry rules. We need to learn from what our competitors are doing and not doing and also from our mistakes.

Providing Superior Services

Since our main goal is to encourage open dialogue and spread our message, we would be very flexible in helping consumers receive and manage our message. For example, we'd make it easy to retrieve archives, search for particular segments of interest, create notifications when user-specified subjects are to be discussed and so on.

Many of our programs would be more enjoyable because they wouldn't constantly be interrupted by annoying commercials which usually undermines any genuinely thoughtful exploration of a topic. Our shows would also be more interesting because we would enable full discussions unconstrained by the chains of political correctness. More accurately, we'd want to create several different virtual channels that would cater to different segments. One important target audience are the large group of Whites mostly brainwashed by anti-White ideology, so the channels targeting them would be more subtle and circumspect in countering the normal MSM propaganda while raising questions about typical MSM assumptions and values. As consumers are deprogrammed, hopefully many would begin exploring more blunt alternatives.

Since the most important parts of our alternative media would be highly truth focused, we could provide much more background and raw data for interested consumers to see the validity of our reporting. For example, detailed collections of legal documents, perhaps with a few blackouts for the reasonable privacy of innocent parties or irrelevant personal details, FOIA requests and their responses or denials, would be linked to stories, along with more background information and full interview transcripts, press conferences, etc. The goal is to provide much more raw material allowing truth auditing than the press normally provides. This sort of truth auditing can be done by well-organized teams of people.

Other sources could be linked or excerpted under fair use. With some improved software tools some of this effort may not be all that difficult and over time very powerful resources could be built up exploring many issues. For example related stories, topics, background, and many other facets could be interrelated. The tools could also be provided to consumers to help them deftly navigate and search these resources as well as enabling an extensive community that would ultimately help recruit further members and volunteers, while allowing vigorous debate with opponents which would help us sharpen our understanding and arguments, or even make corrections or alter our viewpoint when we're wrong.

Alternative Supplements and Watchdogs to Existing Media

I plan to do a separate post discussing a variety of information services that would act as resources for White advocacy and other topics, but one valuable service is the media watchdog. Some already exist, like Media Research Center, but it seemed to have a somewhat partisan GOP and neoconservative slant when I last followed it off-and-on a few years ago. Sometimes we could make use of existing media watchdogs, but we'd also want our own to expose media bias, manipulation and propaganda based on our concerns.

One very important service would be to dissect MSM stories and shows showing exactly how they lie, omit, distort and otherwise dishonestly report the news. Analysis of how they serve other interests could also be done, including navigating the web of corporate and financial relationships linking various power structures.

Part of the offerings would be classic examples of the various propaganda techniques to educate and sensitize the public to dishonest reporting, while another part would be ongoing analysis of everyday news. Much of this everyday analysis could be done by an organized set of amateur volunteers who could be trained and managed by more sophisticated leaders. They could also use powerful information tools and databases to explore other stories and facts related to the story. This technique could be applied to local, regional, national and international stories and the MSM stories could be linked to corresponding alternative media treatments or to alternative media supplements that provide additional details that the MSM left out. By providing these politically incorrect details that the MSM loves to omit, alternative media will both weaken the public's trust in the MSM while enhancing their own reputation.

Some Miscellaneous Thoughts

One key requirement for building these alternative media starting with limited resources is to begin organizing and managing those resources available to us more intelligently and strategically. By pooling a relatively modest contribution of money, time, intelligence, creativity, energy and drive from tens and hundreds of thousands of volunteers, we could achieve far more than just complaining over the internet. I plan to discuss this in a separate post.

Our new media organizations would periodically be infiltrated by leftists and others desiring to undermine them. We would need to be cautious to prevent them from undermining the trust that must be built up slowly and carefully. Since a key value is honesty and transparency, there aren't any particular secrets to hide, but we must still think strategically about how they might try to undermine our fledgling institutions using dirty tricks.

We'll need a group of White advocacy lawyers and legal organizations to help defend against various attacks from our opponents, including frivilous lawsuits designed to consume our resources and energy. If they play dirty, we can also use our creativity to return the favor.

If a censorship regime is created here, we'd need to apply a wide-ranging strategy to overcome this. This is actually a real issue, because many parts of the White world are already facing creeping totalitarianism and censorship much more serious than the US. We'll likely need to help support and strengthen many technologies and services designed to evade censorship and government control. We'd likely have to work on dispersing our content across many countries worldwide and helping average people learn how to work around official censorship using various software tools. Fortunately we wouldn't be alone because there any many different groups working to overcome government censorship.

It's also important to remember that not everyone in the government is happy with the direction things are moving, so one important goal is to encourage our natural allies within many elite-dominated institutions to help undermine the elite and corporate power grabs, corruption and malfeasance.