“Hate Speech” laws and Genocide

On January 22, 2014, in Commentary, by mkennedy

Michael Kennedy

“Hate Speech” laws are designed specifically to render white people incapable of discussing and opposing genocide of our race. Non discrimination laws prevent any racial distinction being drawn, with the exception being when such distinctions are suited to further diversity. Diversity is the goal, and Australia and any other white country will only fully be considered ‘diverse’ when there are no white people left. Up until then, there is always room for more diversity.

Anti-whites demand that all white countries become diverse. Asia does not need diversity, as it is not white and therefore already ‘diverse’ enough. No Black African is told they must become more diverse. No “anti-racist” is demanding that Japan join the 21st century and become racially mixed. An “anti-racist” might point out there is a xenophobic streak in Japan, but they always stop short of demanding that Japan open up its borders and take in non-Asians.

Any program of mass immigration and assimilation, which has NO PLANNED END will continue until the host race is assimilated out. To ask that the program of mass immigration and assimilation be terminated prior to our race being assimilated out is considered racism. There is simply no option acceptable to anti-racists, by which white people can avoid our eventual assimilation and genocide. Anti-racism is therefore a term which masks an anti-white program.

So white people who even *hint* at how they might preserve their race, are ostracized, professionally ruined, or even jailed. So says the law.

This gives us the great moral challenge of our lifetime. Our legal system REQUIRES us to stay silent about our genocide.

Our legal system therefore SUPPORTS genocide, by making speech and action to prevent it illegal, by calling such speech and action ‘HATE’. It actively PROTECTS Genocide of white people, by offering the means by which this Genocide is carried out, protection from criticism.

Therefore, to stay legal, white people must stay silent about the ongoing program of genocide against our race and abide by laws which protect this program.

People will generally follow unjust laws, even if it means committing major moral transgressions, rather than follow a moral path and break the law. It is for this reason that dissidents who are jailed as political prisoners are often lionized as heroes, because they are the exception, rather than the rule. It is also for this reason that totalitarian regimes can establish themselves and survive for a period of time. Those who buck the law of the day are the minority, hence the majority of people will always *appear* to support the state.

It should therefore be of no surprise to realize that most people would allow their race to be subject to being assimilated out, than speak up and fall afoul of ‘hate speech’ laws. Especially since no one points out that there is a moral conflict to begin with.

This point is worth repeating. It is simply not publicly pointed out, that there IS a moral conflict between obeying the law, and the continuation of our race.

However, pointing out the immorality of ‘hate speech’ laws in forcing this moral dilemmas is not illegal, yet. It is now considered ‘hate speech’ and as such, only a matter of time before it becomes illegal too.

We do not necessarily have to be forced to choose between protecting our race and being convicted of discrimination, and abiding by Politically Correct sensibilities and allow our identity to be erased.

If ‘hate speech’ laws were framed in the context of supporting genocide against White people, then all the ‘protection’ that these laws give against petty discrimination and offensive speech will be put into perspective. Would a reasonable, free thinking person place an individuals right not to be offended, if such a thing could be considered a right, over a races right to exist?

The greatest weakness of the ‘hate speech’ laws which exist today, is that they require a major moral transgression to take place, to protect against possible minor one. A clear thinking, openly speaking society would inevitably realise that individual feelings about perceived offence and intolerance are in now way comparable to the rights of a race of people to exist.

Tagged with:

2 Responses to “Hate Speech” laws and Genocide

  1. […] that is supposed to be allowed to happen, our eventual disappearance.  To have laws to restrict people discussion so vitally important, an issue which will become THE issue for us in the 21st century, would only breed resentment, […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Please enter CAPTCHA *