 |
Essay |
|
Essay |
How To Eliminate Hate
by Carlos W. Porter
I just got five months for "incitement to racial hatred". (No details, please; I’m saving them for the New York Times.)
Actually, I’m in favour of "hate" laws; I think we need them; I think they are essential. The only problem is, the penalties are nowhere near severe enough!
Is a real criminal impressed by a few months in a reasonably comfortable jail? Of course not. The attitude of a real criminal is, "I’ve robbed 3 banks and they’re charging me with car theft? What a joke." That’s my attitude.
It therefor follows that if we are serious about stamping Out "hatred", all forms of "hatred" must be punishable by instant death.
But I think the procedures and criteria employed should be the same as under the obscenity laws.
For example, back in the good old days (when we were prosecuting Jews for violating the obscenity laws), Federal, state, and local statutes were often extremely specific and detailed as to exactly what was prohibited and what was not. There were long lists describing in great detail what was permissible and what was not. (The strictest statutes, surprisingly, were the state laws of Oregon and the city ordinances of Sacramento.)
Nudity, for example, might be entirely acceptable, but there was to be ‘no touching", no "display of the genitals", etc. "in a primarily sexual context", no "sexual acts", whether "normal or abnormal", involving "one or more persons", of "the same or opposite sex", etc. etc.
All this broke down under endless hair-splitting by the Jews, who always claim to be unable to understand simple language when it suits them.
"What is art", what is "normal", what is "redeeming social value", what is "patently offensive to the standards of the community", they asked.
What is the "community": is it California, San Francisco, or just North Beach? Does the "community" include children? How can you say that deviant pornography is "offensive" if it doesn’t "offend" deviants? Swan Lake in the nude would still be Swan Lake, and that’s art; so why isn’t cunnilingus on a jukebox art too?
It was finally decided that "obscenity" meant "appeal to prurient interest". So in every obscenity trial, the defense lawyer simply asked the prosecution witnesses whether the material appealed to their "prurient interest". The question went something like this:
"How do you feel about this material personally, do you find it stimulating?" The answer was always "No, I think it’s disgusting , or "I think it’s boring". Then, since nobody would
admit that the stuff turned him/her on, it was then argued that it doesn't appeal to anybody's "prurient interest", and was therefore not obscene!
In one Supreme Court case (US vs. Cohen), it was held that the words "Fuck the Draft" did not appeal to anybody’s "prurient interest" and were therefor not obscene; a long series of other cases then held that expressions such as "Motherfucking racist pig cop" did not appeal to anybody’s "purient interest" and were not obscene! Nothing ever appealed to anybody’s "prurient interest", so nothing was ever obscene, so everything had to be legalized!
So I say: do the liberals admit to "hating" anybody because of racist epithets (like "nigger", "kike", "gook", "queer", etc.) or "racist" or revisionist literature? Of course not. The liberals always claim they're afraid somebody ELSE might hate somebody!
OK. Since nobody admits to "hating" anybody because of OUR literature, it follows that OUR literature does not constitute "hatred", and that we cannot be convicted of "hate crimes".
But, since EVERYBODY admits to hating "Nazis" and "racists" because of literature published by Jews, it follows that while WE cannot be convicted of "hate", the Jews CAN be.
Since "hatred" will be punishable by death, this will give us an opportunity to exterminate the Jews (assuming, purely for the purposes of theoretical argument, that this is our intention) without being accused of ‘anti-Semitism".
Blacks and Mexicans all hate each other, and both hate us (as they will readily admit), so they’re all punishable by death. The various sub-species of gooks all hate each other, so it’s in the "drinko" with "el Chinko", etc.
Homosexuals, by way of variety (since they like variety so much), will be convicted of "hetero-phobic hysteria" and will be exiled to one of our Pleasure Island FAGULAGS (faggot gulags) in the frozen tundra of the North, where they can do what they like to each other, but will be denied police protection and medical care. When they get done robbing, murdering, and torturing each other, and infecting each other with all their filthy diseases, that will be the end of the current year’s faggot crop (until next year; presumably, in a sane society, the crop would be much smaller). To keep them "stoned" in accordance with Biblical teachings, we’ll air-drop them poppers and alcohol on Sunday morning -- but no food, unless they can grow it. Homo, homo, on the range-o, R.I.P.
Presto! An all-White America. No more niggers, no more gooks; no more coons, kikes, queers, and spooks. And all without racism, anti-Semitism, RICOH, or even conspiracy theory (which we can still use) -- just good, old-fashioned, "hate" laws.
The Jews think they can twist everything just to suit themselves; well, we’ll just have to twist them back again. Twisting words always ends with twisting necks.