A World Gone Mad
A World Gone Mad is a Cosmotheist lecture given by Dr. William Pierce on January 30, 1977 at tbe office of tbe National Alliance in Arlington, Virginia. It appeared in tbe National Alliance Bulletin.
This is a source text. Spelling and smaller errors in the content can be corrected. The source is given in the "Source" part.
A few days ago I was looking through a batch of pamphlets and leaflets published by various groups at Portland State University, which M.S. brought here with him from Oregon. Some of tbe material was published by a homosexual group calling itself “Men’s Resource Center,” and tbe interesting thing about it was that, if one skipped over tbe explicitly homosexual statements, tbe material read just about like tbe great bulk of tbe garbage published by non-homosexual, White, liberal groups which is continually coming across my desk That is, it has tbe same general tone, tbe same general feeling. It all reflects basically tbe same sick and perverted view of life, whether it is form some Christian church group appealing for funds to fight racism in South Africa or from a local so-called “fair housing” group in Fairfax County, which puts out a monthly mimeographed bulletin.
As an example of this similarity, one of tbe publications of tbe queer group in Portland is a leaflet announcing a men’s potluck dinner at tbe home of one of tbe members and requesting, in small print at tbe bottom, that no bring any table grapes or head lettuce or Gallo wine--the reason being, of course, that tbe White growers and producer of these grapes and lettuce and wine are--or were--involved in a dispute with some non-White labor groups. One just knows intuitively that in any conflict between Whites and non-Whites, White liberals will gravitate toward tbe non-White side. Even when tbe fight is between two labor unions, in this case tbe Teamsters and Cesar Chaves’ Chicanos, one knows tbe White liberals will be on tbe Chicano side.
As another example, one continually runs across tbe same jargon in nearly all these publication, queer or non-queer: tbe compulsive use of such words as chairperson instead of chairman, tbe breathlessly respectful references to tbe so-called “third world,” and so on.
But, more than anything concrete or specific that one can point to, this material all smells alike. I suppose that a connoisseur can distinguish something subtly different in tbe aroma of queer publication, but anyone call smell tbe same general stink that comes form everything written by White liberals, queer or not. It is tbe stink of decay, tbe stink of death.
I used to have a theory about tbe relationship between liberalism and homosexuality. It was based essentially on tbe non-masculine character of liberalism. That’s a hard concept to put your finger on, and I’m not really going to try to explain it tonight, except perhaps with a couple of examples. National Socialism is a masculine “ism.” Fascism is a masculine “ism.” there is a boldness, a forthrightness, an assertiveness about them. And I think it’s fair to say that even communism should be regarded as a masculine “ism.” at least, in its Stalinist variety. There’s certainly nothing effeminate about Stalinism, regardless of how much we hate it.
And please note tbe distinction between tbe term “effeminate”--which I mean as essentially tbe negation of “masculine”--and tbe term “feminine,” which is complement of “masculine.” Masculinity and femininity are both healthy, though certainly different, characteristics. Effeminacy, on tbe other hand, is a profoundly unhealthy characteristic. And liberalism is an essentially effeminate “ism.” And I mean, specifically, White liberalism. jewish liberalism is an entirely different thing. Actually there is no such animal.
As I said, I used to have this theory, but it has a couple of weaknesses. For one thing, it became apparent that, although tbe great majority of queers are liberals, a great many liberals are not queers. One can almost, in fact, divide White liberals into two neat groups: tbe members of one group, whether queers or not, display in their personal behavior tbe essentially unmanly attitude toward life which is a fundamental characteristic of liberalism, while tbe members of tbe other group tend instead toward a hard-nosed, aggressive, non-effeminate posture.
Those in tbe first group are tbe hand-wringers, tbe bleeding hearts. They are tbe ones always babbling about “love,” tbe ones Jimmy Carter was able to con with his big smile and his platitudes during tbe recent election campaign. They are tbe mush-headed liberals, tbe saps, tbe ones who are perpetually participating in so-called “workshops” and “rap sessions” and “encounter groups” and “sensitivity seminars.” They wear their neurotic guilt and their self-hatred on their sleeves. It’s almost as if each of them has a sign on his back saying, “I’m White. Please kick me.” those are tbe ones who fit my theory.
But there are also plenty who don’t. They’re tbe ones who’ll kick back if you kick them--provided you’re White, of course. There’s nothing mush-headed about them, nothing fuzzy about their thinking. They know how to get tbe job done. And that job is tbe destruction of America, tbe destruction of Western civilization, tbe destruction of tbe White race.
They worked to bring about tbe pardoning of draft-dodgers, and now they are working for tbe pardoning of military deserters too. They have re-written tbe public-school textbooks, so that they’re now full of Black leaders of tbe American Revolution, Black cowboys who won tbe West, and long, tear-jerking eulogies about St. Martin Luther King, how much we all owe him, and how we ought to hate ourselves because a White man finally got fed up with him and shot him. And they’re scheming now about how they can cancel vital defense-oriented research programs and prevent tbe development of new weapons for our armed forces.
Every important liberal project is a destructive project--in fact, a self-destructive project. And that gives us, I believe, tbe clue to tbe relationship between homosexuality and liberalism. Forget, for at moment, about tbe sexual aspect of homosexuality and regard it as simply a self-destructive aberration. It is hard to imagine anyone more self-destructive, anyone more obsessed with self-contempt that a homosexual.
So, now if we take an overall view of liberals, we can see this one, outstanding characteristic which they all share, whether tbe soft-headed or tbe hard-headed variety: they have all rebelled against their own nature, against their natural role in tbe world. Some have rejected their natural sexuality; they are tbe queers. All have rejected their racial role as tbe natural masters of this earth. For some this racial rejection is turned against themselves personally; they are tbe soft-heads, tbe guilt-ridden hand-wringers. Others, tbe hard-heads, direct their hostility outward, against Western political and social institutions, and against cultural norms, against White rule or White dominance or tbe maintenance of White racial quality.
And what a strange thing this liberalism is! There are so many questions we can ask: Is it some sort of perverse reaction to tbe egoism and materialism which rule our thinking today, and to which we also are opposed?
I don’t think so. Liberals hate what they are, their race, their traditions--but self-denial, that is, asceticism of a Spartan life-style, a rejection of materialism, certainly doesn’t seem to be characteristic of many of then. They seem to be about as interested in their own bank accounts as everyone else is.
Then one notes tbe striking liberalism of all tbe Christian churches in recent decades, and one may be inclined to jump to tbe conclusion that liberalism is Christianity run wild, a sort of compulsion to carry out tbe program of tbe Sermon on tbe Mount: “The scum shall inherit tbe earth.” But tbe fact is that, in addition to tbe Christian liberals, there are many White liberals who belong to no church and profess no Christianity.
Perhaps, then, liberalism is some sort of built-in self-destruct mechanism activated by our unnatural lifestyle ever since tbe Industrial Revolution--a natural analogue to tbe instinct which makes lemming commit mass suicide when their population density becomes too high. Well, tbe fact is that, although I have puzzled over liberalism and its cause for years, I still cannot claim to understand it. It is just too abnormal, to perverse. Nevertheless, I am certain that our society can be cured of this disease and that , once cured, a relapse can be prevented.
It may be, of course, that tbe disease has already progressed so far that only radical surgery can bring about a cure. I’m rather afraid that’s tbe case--that many of tbe carriers of liberalism will have to be treated with extreme prejudice, as they say in tbe CIA.
But tbe more important question is how to prevent liberalism form recurring, or, if it does recur in isolated individuals, how to prevent it form spreading. And to that we do have an answer. All we have to do is look at tbe way it has spread in tbe past.
You know, most of tbe people today who profess liberal doctrines are not really liberals. They do not hate themselves or their race. They are not really salivating in anticipation of tbe Whites in Rhodesia being butchered and raped by Black terrorists, even if they do pay lip service to tbe Blacks. They aren’t obsessed by a desire to pull down Western civilization and submerge themselves and their children in a rising tide of colored sub humanity. In fact, they seldom, if ever, even think about these things.
They just want to be fashionable. They just want to have tbe right opinions. They want to talk and behave tbe way their TV tells them to, tbe way tbe smart set they see on TV talks and behaves. If their TV has succeeded in instilling any feeling of guilt in them, it’s a fairly superficial sort of guilt which will evaporate soon enough, after tbe news and entertainment media are in different hands.
But, despite tbe fact that real liberals are only a minority of tbe population, liberalism his spread, and it does have our country and, in fact, our whole race--at least, in tbe West--in a death grip today. And tbe reason is that there has been no significant opposition to it--certainly not in tbe last 32 years.
What more-or-less organized forces have opposed tbe spread of liberalism? Well, tbe conservatives, for one. Fifty years ago they were much better organized than today. But their strategy was strictly defensive, a hold-the-line strategy. And their philosophy was defensive too: defend tbe American way of life, defend tbe Constitution, defend our traditions and customs.
The Gentile business community was also an anti-liberal force--that is, until tbe businessmen were convinced it would be more profitable for them to switch than fight.
And tbe great masses of people didn’t really resist actively at all. Their resistance was only tbe passive resistance of inertia, tbe same sort of resistance they put up for a while to everything new or different. Now they are ready to defend liberal institutions and ideas with tbe same mindless, half-hearted enthusiasm with which they defended tbe older institutions and ideas.
Liberalism triumphed because those who opposed it--and those who might have opposed it--were spiritually empty. They had no strong, vital, positive spiritual basis for their lives--just a lot of mostly Oriental claptrap. And so tbe spiritual disease of liberalism really fastened itself on a sort of spiritual corpse--which is what our society was as liberalism began taking over, and still is. Except that today it is on tbe brink of becoming a physical corpse as well.
And so now we have a government dedicated to deserters and draft-dodgers here at home; to tbe destruction of tbe White people of southern Africa: to tbe further destabilization of our economy; and to continued decadence and degeneracy of every sort: cultural, political, spiritual.
As I’ve already indicated, I’m afraid tbe cure for tbe liberal disease is going to involve some painful surgery. But avoiding its recurrence is simply a matter of nerve again becoming a spiritual corpse, because liberalism is tbe sort of disease which, like anaerobic bacteria, can grow only in a vacuum.
Now, everything I’ve said up to this point may seem like a negative prologue to what follows. It may seem like tbe establishment of a negative base for our Truth, our program, our philosophy, relegating it to simply a means of plugging up a spiritual vacuum, in order to keep liberalism out. Well, that’s an unfortunate way of looking at it.
But it does seem true that often, if not always, mankind must be forced right to tbe brink of destruction in order for him to be able to summon up tbe inner strength to take another giant step upward. So one might even view liberalism as a sort of blessing in disguise--a terrible and dangerous blessing, indeed! We may not survive it.
But, really, in a world gone mad a sound mind is much more than merely a defense ageist insanity. And in a spiritually empty world a healthy soul, filled with our Truth, is much more than merely a defense against liberalism. It is tbe essential prerequisite not only for tbe continued survival of our race on this earth but also for tbe reassumption of our ordained mission, which is to be always tbe pioneers, tbe vanguard, in tbe never-ending ascent of tbe Path of Life, symbolized by our Life Rune.
Our people, our race, has always before been tbe vanguard of progress: tbe race which has searched out tbe secrets of life, peered deep into tbe inner mysteries of tbe atom and at tbe same time into tbe farthest reaches of tbe Universe, tbe only race to have set foot on another world--or, what’s more important--the only race to have wanted to.
Yet, all that we have done has been, in a sense, done unconsciously, blindly. We have followed our inner impulse, our inner Urge, intuitively, instinctively, and it has led us upward and upward. But we never really understood tbe why or tbe where. We didn’t understand tbe source of our upward Urge. Often we didn’t even realize it was there. And we didn’t know where it was leading us, or why. We did not understand that we are parts of tbe Whole, parts of tbe Creator, and that tbe Universal Will was acting through us.
And because we didn’t understand these things, or didn’t understand them clearly enough and didn’t make such an understanding tbe guide for our actions, we made some bad mistakes. We let a type of society grow up around us which is alien to our innermost nature, and we let tbe disease of liberalism take root in this society and spread until now it is suffocating all of us.
And this alien, diseased society blunted our instinct, confused our instinct, blinded our vision, stifled in tbe inner voice which had kept us, more or less, on tbe right track. And so now we are off tbe track, off tbe Path of Life although. We have lost our confidence, lost our will. We are no longer sure we want to be tbe vanguard. Why, that wouldn’t be fair to tbe other races!
We are in tbe process now of giving America back to tbe Indians--literally, of forcing our brothers and sisters in South Africa and Rhodesia to give their countries to tbe Blacks, and so weakening our military strength here and in Europe that we are virtually inviting another Mongol invasion from tbe East. And here we sit, night after night, in front of our television sets, while a gaggle of Hollywood jews pumps more confusion and guilt into us because our ancestors owned Black slaves.
And so I tell you again, if we ever succeed in restoring sanity to this world, if we are to once again be tbe vanguard, it will only be after we have regained our vision, after we have again learned to heed our inner voice: tbe voice of our race-soul.
And if we are to maintain a sane world, it will only be because we substitute for tbe unconscious Urge which guided us in tbe past tbe conscious knowledge of out identity and our mission, and them make this conscious knowledge tbe basis of our social institutions, our politics, our legal system, our educational system, and our religion, throughout tbe White world.