WHO'S FOR DEMOCRACY?
by Professor Revilo P. Oliver (excerpted
from his Populism and Elitism)
Excerpt 1982
Democracy, in the correct, Jeffersonian sense of that word,
still exerts a great influence over the thinking of our contemporaries, although
no example of it in practice can be found in the world today. It is a theory
that was first formulated in the democratic states of ancient Greece and has
never been entirely forgotten since that time. It engendered the Mediaeval
aphorism, *vox populi, vox Dei*, which, so far as I know, was first quoted by
Alciun, who ridicules it; and it reappears in hundreds of modern writers who
champion, in one form or another, the concept of majority rule. Although now
reduced to a mere theory, it still has charms and evokes some odd tendencies in
persons who are intelligent enough to discriminate between democracy and the
common practice of running herds of biped cattle through polling places and
counting their noses.
'Populists' must remember, first of all, that Jeffersonian
democracy was not intended for Timbuktoo, Fiji, or Erewhon. It was designed for
the thirteen colonies that had just won their independence--for a specific
people in an historically unique situation.
Those colonies came close to being a nation in the primary
sense of that word, a *natio*; a large tribe formed of persons related by
ancestry and birth, i.e. a racially homogeneous people. The colonies had been
peopled by Englishmen, Scots (including some from Ireland), Germans, Dutch,
Scandinavians, and Frenchmen. They were all Aryans and most of them were Nordic.
The only racial aliens were the Jews, and at that time there were comparatively
few, their depredations were stealthy and almost unnoticed, and their contempt
for the stupid Aryans was concealed by their barbaric religion and their
habitual whining about "persecution." Among the leaders of the
Revolution, only Franklin seems clearly to have apprehended the menace of the
covertly hostile *enclave*.
To be sure, there were many aborigines on the continent,
but they were relegated to the unsettled territories and formed no part of the
American population. In the colonies, there were numerous Congoids, but they
were domestic livestock, and before 1800 very few Americans regarded the animals
as dangerous. Even later, many of the most determined opponents of slavery
dismissed as emotionally overwrought Jefferson's prescient opposition to
slavery, which he had vehemently incorporated in his draft of the Declaration of
Independence.
Most of the opposition to slavery came from sentimentalists
and religious fanatics, whom Jefferson viewed with scorn. His opposition was on
practical grounds.[1] He recognized the numerous
and prolific Congoids as a threat to the racial integrity of the new nation, and
he was aware of the potential danger of maintaining in our territory such large
and increasing numbers of a biologically inferior and innately savage race. He
foresaw that, if emancipated, they would "stain the blood" of our race
by copulation with degenerate whites and thus produce unnatural hybrids; it
followed, therefore, that "When [a negro] is freed, he is to be removed
beyond the reach of mixture."
Jefferson thought it impossible to prevent the eventual
emancipation of the slaves in one way or another. "Nothing is more
certainly written in the book of fate than that these people are to be free;
*nor is it less certain that the two races, equally free, cannot live in the
same government*."[2]
Disaster could be averted only by exporting the rapidly multiplying anthropoids
to Africa or to some nearer and more convenient place, especially the island of
Hispaniola after it became available. Jefferson drafted several plans to make
that necessary safeguard of American liberty economically feasible, but the
tragic blindness of his contemporaries prevented the adoption of any of them.
For Jeffersonian democracy, an independent and racially
homogenous population of Nordics is but the first requisite, for there is great
inequality within our race. It is true that Jefferson put into his Declaration
of Independence a wild rhetorical flourish, as dramatic as a war-cry, claiming
that "all men are created equal." He was not a moron, and cannot have
meant anything so absurd as is sometimes supposed. What he meant was that all
Englishmen should be equal before the law. He was reacting against the class
structure of English society and an aristocracy, of which the greater part had
been created by kings and ennobled parvenus, often for the most discreditable
services, so that socially and morally worthless individuals were given special
privileges because they were descended from men who had, rightly or wrongly,
been elevated to the peerage. Jefferson recognized, of course, the biologically
inequality of all men: "There is a natural aristocracy among men. The
grounds for this are virtue[3]
and talents...There is also an artificial aristocracy, founded on wealth and
birth, without either virtue or
talents; for *with* these, it would belong in the first class."
To ensure the dominance of a natural aristocracy, Jefferson
relied on his project of an educational system that would progressively identify
the superior men by eliminating at each stage after the very first the innately
inferior; a rigorous discrimination would prevent the advancement of men beyond
the status for which they were fitted by nature. So vital to the survival of the
nation did Jefferson consider this system of selection that he, as in his famous
foundation of the University of Virginia, believed a strictly secular and
cultural education, based on the Classics, history, and science, and excluding
all superstitions, should be financed and maintained by taxation. The English
language contains so few words of reprobation and invective that I cannot
imagine what Jefferson would have said, had he foreseen the moral and mental rot
that made possible the capture of the public schools by the vast gang of
swindlers, saboteurs, and dolts that has made of those schools a terrible
machine for inculcating the most bizarre and noxious superstitions and deforming
the minds of children with what amounts to infantile paralysis of the cerebrum.
(---four sections omitted here--Ed.)
I have tried, not to give a synopsis of Jefferson's
thought, but only to show what conditions are prerequisite for the democracy he
championed. If we wish to institute such a true democracy, we shall first have
to create the conditions in which it is possible.
The proponents of democracy will have to begin by
deporting, vaporizing, or otherwise disposing of the swarms of Jews, Congoids,
Mongoloids, and mongrels that now infest our territory and are becoming ever
more numerous and audacious in their unappeasable hatred of us. I cannot suggest
offhand a convenient way of effecting that indispensable *epuration* of the
population, but I am willing to believe that it could still be carried out.
Let us assume that you have reduced the population to
Aryans, so that we once again have racial homogeneity. Forgive me, dear patriot,
but I must be so tactless as to remind you that more, much more, than half of
those excellent Aryans will be persons who are now writing checks whenever
Falwell and his malodorous kind pitch the woo at the glassy-eyed suckers; who
happily pay bureaucrats hired to hector the masochists; who happily send their
children into the degradation and filth of "integrated" schools; who,
like born slaves, cringe before the goons of Infernal Revenue and hope only to
be able to chisel a few bucks here and there without incurring punishment by
their owners; who are now determined never to think about the survival of their
voluntarily debased and defiled race; who are so lost to manhood that they
endure the most abject servitude. These are the newly freed citizens who you
expect to govern themselves by free elections in which a majority will make an
intelligent choice! Are you counting on some miracle of leadership and
inspiration that will make men out of mice? Or, do you intend to disenfranchise,
most undemocratically, the Aryan majority in the hope that they, like men maimed
by accident or war, can transmit to their offspring a genetic heritage free of
their own deformity, so that a future generation of our race will recover the
manhood, the self-respect, the intelligence that their sires of today have so
blatantly lost?
I know that what I have just said will send many
well-meaning and sentimental Americans into a tizzy or a tantrum. I am sorry,
but I remind them that I did not design the universe. I did not create the
realities of biology and history. And a would-be democrat, like an elfin
princess who marries a mortal, must take the bitter with the sweet.
***************
This article originally appeared in Liberty Bell magazine, published monthly by George P. Dietz since September 1973. For subscription information please write to Liberty Bell Publications, Post Office Box 21, Reedy WV 25270 USA; or call 304-927-4486.
[1] There was a slight humanitarian element in Jefferson's attitude. The slaves whom the Congoids sold to entrepreneurs (many, but not all, of whom were Jews) were shipped across the Atlantic packed into slave ships in which they had to exist for weeks and even months in conditions to which Aryans (or, at least, Nordics) would not wish to see any mammals subjected. Jefferson had the strong aversion from gratuitous cruelty to sentient mammals that is characteristic of our race and conspicuously absent in other races. Jefferson was also deeply concerned about the moral effects of slavery on many owners.
[2] The Jefferson Memorial is the most beautiful building in the District of Corruption. It is an architectural gem and, what is more, appropriate, since it is what Jefferson himself would have wanted. It is defaced, however, by the inscription on one of the inner walls of the first part of this sentence and the omission of the words I have italicized. It thus defames Jefferson by implication and was, of course, designed to fool visitors who did not know the complete sentence. There is much to be said for the view that "Liberal intellectuals" are compulsive liars.
[3] In Jefferson's time "virtue" still retained its proper meaning, denoting *manly* excellence, including courage and integrity as shown by both moral and intellectual honesty. It is sad that so useful a word has been perverted by the gabble of Christian propagandists.