I've had it with criminal minorities - but I've REALLY had it with their white liberal apologists ... AND ESPECIALLY WITH RACE-LIARS WHO HAVE THE GALL TO CALL THEMSELVES 'CONSERVATIVES'.

There is no conservatism apart from racial nationalism. Not in today's world, anyway.

Of course they were right on every single point, as the condition of all US cities clearly demonstrate. "Welfare" programs (so-called because the justification for their establishment comes from the common welfare clause in the Constitution) created a dependant class which could be counted on to elect the politicians who promised the benefits would continue. This led to an expansion of a publicly funded leisure class whose sport was, and still is, violent crime. The crime and increased tax burden drove productive white citizens out of the city limits into the suburbs and to replace the tax revenues lost by white flight, the shamelessly corrupt politicians lured banks and other corporations into the cities by giving them free property (taken from small to medium sized businesses whose clientele had moved out of the cities) on which to build their high rise buildings.

Most downtown areas of US cities are now covered with corporate headquarters buildings and government buildings, and the government offices employ the predominately black bureaucratic middle class. The urban tax consumers who are employed by government as well as those who are dependent on welfare programs are mostly black, as are a majority of the city politicians in many cities. Blacks are not a minority in the cities and haven't been for quite awhile.

Today's American blacks segregate themselves in their social events, as demonstrated by Black Bike Week, Black Spring Break, Black Circuses, Black History festivals, and so on. Black people are presented as being morally, intellectually, and physically superior to whites in movies and TV series.

White people are expected to be elaborately polite to black people while black people are allowed to be as rude and inconsiderate of whites as they like. To judge by the content of the US news and entertainment media, it would be easy to conclude that whites are 12% of the population and blacks are the majority.

Liberals and respectable conservatives say there is this RACE problem. Everybody says this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours into ALL white countries and ONLY into white countries.

The Netherlands and Belgium are as crowded as Japan or Taiwan, but nobody says Japan or Taiwan will solve this RACE problem by bringing in millions of third worlders and quote assimilating unquote with them.

Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for ALL white countries and ONLY white countries to assimilate, i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites.

What if I said there was this RACE problem and this RACE problem would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were brought into EVERY black country and ONLY into black countries?

How long would it take anyone to realize I’m not talking about a RACE problem. I am talking about the final solution to the BLACK problem?

And how long would it take any sane black man to notice this and what kind of psycho black man wouldn’t object to this?

But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against my race, the white race, Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that I am a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.

They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white.

Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.

whitakeronline.ORG
http://www.nationalsalvation.net/

To continue from comment 13 above.

So yes, the lefties are, I suspect, correct in their empirical belief that whites, who are assumed to have the bulk of 'redistributable' wealth, would not wish their tax dollars to go for the benefit of predominantly non-white schools, and hence their desire to foster numerical integration as the way to ensure equal funding is understandable.

Indeed, there is considerable proof for their (morally illegitimate) concerns, at least in California. Here, whites, many of whom are single, urban and childless, with routine majorities vote down new bond issues for public schools. Moreover, as many of those public schools are infested with typically socially and behaviorally deficient minorities, especially genetically violence-prone and substantially ineducable blacks, white parents often are forced to send their children to private schools, and therefore obviously have no reason to raise their own property taxes when they are already in effect paying double tuitions. And why should they?

Which brings me to my second point. Some of the weaklings (and such are liberals, pure and simple) in the comments above rejoice at Mr. Richert's apparent denunciation of de jure segregation (which Sam Francis certainly supported, though even he wasn't brave or stupid enough to admit such in public; even a great man needs to pay the rent!).

I appreciate the not particularly subtle distinction (this is not a criticism) Richert draws between ending de jure segregation and government's compelling racial integration. But what, exactly, was wrong with state-mandated racial segregation in the first place? The whole purpose was to protect whites, the morally superior race, from the harm and characterological contamination that could be expected to result (and which did result, as the history of Negro predation against whites, in schools and everywhere else, of the last half-century attests) from placing them in constant physical proximity to the decidedly morally and culturally inferior blacks.

As the southern segregationist intellectual and racial activist Sam Dickson has wondered, were they (segregation's defenders) not right in their dire prognostications? Well, Mr. Richert, weren't they?
I defy you to try to prove me wrong (assuming that you have intellectual self-respect, which I'm sure you do).

America's hideous experiment in multiracialism has proven itself to be a world-historically costly failure - for whites - with absolutely nothing in the way of compensatory benefits (non-white immigration is liable to the same indictment). How many readers of these comments, or of CHRONICLES, would weep if a great Marcus Garvey-style wave of black separatism swept over the nation and impelled millions of African-Americans to return to their real homeland of Africa? I suspect most of you, if you aren't too cowed or cowardly to be honest , AT LEAST with yourselves, would be more relieved than anything else. Perhaps we should take that psychologically understandable and morally acceptable sentiment and turn it into the basis for a national movement, whose ultimate goal would be to turn that sentiment into physical reality.

Discrete populations either fight to expand, or wither and die. That is the iron law of life, in this world your God created, but apparently long ago abandoned. We whites are alone, and it it to 'ourselves alone' that we must look for succor and survival.

First, the very idea of government operated schools is both a moral and political outrage. People should pay for their own children's education, as they are expected to do for any other good or service on the free market. Of course, this libertarian position should not be considered absolute. One could imagine, in a VERY different social and historical context, an authentic conservative advocating, for impeccably conservative reasons, some statist/communitarian involvement in education.

But in a society that is anything but a true nation or 'ethny' or 'volksgemeinschaft', one that either originally was founded as, or at least has devolved into, a heterogeneous, socially atomised collection of mere acquisitive individuals (and yes, such a society is, unlike, say, communism or Islamic theocracy, morally defensible, though I personally disapprove of it), it is illogical and immoral to expect some to pay for the education (or housing, welfare, childcare, nutrition, etc) of any others - but ESPECIALLY others who are genetically (racially) unlike themselves.

What kind of biological fools aid the reproductive success of their planetary genetic competitors (and more often, outright enemies)?

(Answer: Christian and liberal whites. ONLY Christian and liberal whites. No other race behaves in this manner, which is why our race is dying, whilst all others thrive.)

So no, Mr. Richert, it is not the duty of taxpayers to 'equalize' school funding, or 'opportunity' or anything else, regardless of what happened in the past wrt issues of segregation (surely you are familiar with the long line of classical liberal scholars who have decimated the ideas of 'social(ist) justice', 'welfare rights', 'equal access', and all similar Jacobin nonsense).

Bring back the Chinese Exclusion Act.

I too think that Brown was flawed. I should not have read more into Francis' writings than what he wrote. If he did not like de jure segregation, then I think that is good.

The tyranny of nothing, paid for with trillions from millions. I'm inclined to think it wouldn't matter where a kid is sent if there is no learning taking place there, anyway.

I lived in Rockford for two years, and I liked the size and location of the city very much. But, it seemed to be an annual event to anticipate just when the school district was going to run out of money...require more taxes...get worse "results" on standardized tests. Rockford is not an isolated example.

May God bless the children in places like these, may He guard them from the foolishness of those entrusted with their care, and may He give us the light of learning in spite of ourselves.