(c) Copyright 1998: Graham Strachan
The most effective tool for breaking up nations, fragmenting their societies into various warring factions or tribes, and rendering them ripe for globalisation, is the Pressure Group. The nature of pressure groups was analysed by Ayn Rand in a book ‘The New Left’ published in 1975, in a chapter entitled ‘The Age of Envy’. The purpose of pressure groups is to divide the community, and to bring about social disruption justifying the imposition of totalitarian rule by stages.
The requirements for a pressure group are:
The pressure group’s CAUSE arises out of its perceived weakness, or the perception that the group is being ‘victimised’ by aggressors, real or imaginary. This alleged vulnerability or victimisation is then publicised by the complicit media, and calls are made for government intervention to protect the group. In a pinch it may be necessary to arrange incidents which serve to confirm the claims of vulnerability and persecution. The group’s weakness can be of any sort: intellectual, moral, financial or numerical, but the Cause has to have a core of truth about it. Most of the claims of modern pressure groups were legitimate to begin with, but the object of a pressure group is not to bring about the resloution of genuine grievances; it is to cause social disruption.
The pressure group then needs an IDEOLOGY, a false story about the world which justifies its intended actions. The ideology blames the group’s alleged vulnerability and victimhood on its class enemies, and to this end a range of villains can be invented. The villains need to be identified by short easy-to-say labels, which not only bring them into existence as a class where such a class may not have existed before, but it also makes them readily identifiable as scapegoats. To this end modern society is supposedly populated with tribes of rednecks, racists, homophobes, femophobes, xenophobes, anti-semites, neo-nazis and so on. The villains are said to be suffering from an irrational state of mind, harbouring unjustified animosity towards the favoured pressure group. Any transgression against the group then acquires special status as a ‘hate crime’, deserving of particular media outrage, government intervention, and special legislation to protect the group.
The gullible public, and many people commonly referred to as ‘do-gooders’, tend to believe it all, and assume that the real purpose of the pressure group is to rectify actual wrongs or injustices. This overlooks the reality of class warfare, and the ethics of hate. In fact the rectification of actual wrongs is counterproductive to the group’s real objectives, since it serves to dilute the legitimacy of the group’s demands, and to reduce its effectiveness as a socially disruptive force. This is why, no matter how much public money is spent on the group, no matter how many special laws and privileges are conferred on it, the core grievances never seem to be resolved. It is for this reason also that reasonable people, who genuinely care about the welfare of group members, must never be allowed to represent the group. They are prone to come to terms with the class enemy when real demands are met. Only non-representative spokespeople acquainted with the ideology of social revolution and pressure group warfare can be permitted to speak for the group.
Along with special privileges and protection, the right to practice a DOUBLE STANDARD which divides and disintegrates the community is then demanded by the pressure group. It claims entitlement to behave toward the majority in an openly offensive manner, while strict codes of behavior are imposed on the majority as to how they must approach, think about, and speak to members of the favoured pressure group. Thus Aborigines can abuse and even assault whites with impunity, whereas if whites do the same to Aborigines they will find themselves in court. Women can be as offensive as they like towards men, whereas if men act the same way towards women they will be accused of ‘sexism’ and hauled before a tribunal.
If whites try to protect their culture it is ‘chauvinism’ or ‘discrimination ’, but if Aborigines do so it is ‘pride in their Aboriginality’. A black minority is welcome to taunt the white majority with claims that ‘white men have no culture’ (as though Mozart, Michaelangelo and Shakespeare and penicillin count for nothing), but if whites fail to fawn over primitive cave art with the required politically correct reverence, they are likely to find themselves in trouble. When men outnumbered women in certain university faculties that was said to be proof of ‘discrimination’. Now that women outnumber men in the same faculties, that’s ‘social justice’.
During January 1992, Channel 9 Brisbane screened an hour-long documentary called ‘Kenyan Trilogy’, documenting the circumcision rituals of the Massai in Kenya. The commentary lamented the fact that such sacred rituals were ‘under threat’ through exposure to white civilisation. In other media during the same period circumcision in white Western society was being condemned as unnecessary ‘cosmetic surgery’. What was culture and sacred when performed by the Massai, was cosmetic surgery and wasteful when performed by whites. The socially divisive effect of these double standards erodes the society from within.
The PURPOSE of pressure group warfare is two-fold: (1) to disintegrate existing society and render it ripe for communisation (globalisation) (2) to destroy the concept of individualism and of individual rights, thereby rendering the society amenable to collectivisation, essential to communisation. The idea of individual rights is replaced by the notion that rights accrue to individuals only through membership of an identifiable group. Affirmative Action for example (quotas of women in jobs, parliament etc.), serves not only to create strained workplace relationships between the sexes, it also militates against genuine individual career women. It assumes that gender counts more then ability and intelligence. As Ayn Rand (a woman) pointed out, feminism’s most pernicious claim is not so much that men and women are equal, but that all women are equal.
The ongoing hold the pressure group has over the rest of the community is dependent on sustaining the notion of COLLECTIVE GUILT: that the majority, or members of it, are responsible for the group’s predicament, and are therefore guilty and deserving of punishment, sometimes referred to as ‘reverse discrimination’. If evidence in the present is lacking, particularly as group demands are met and it comes to enjoy privileges not available to the broader community, ‘guilt for the crimes of the past’ can be invoked. White people are accused of being stained with ‘White Man’s Guilt’, responsible for the ‘sins of Captain Cook’, while men are accused of ‘past discrimination’ against women, past ‘hate crimes’ against gays and lesbians.
White Man’s Guilt purportedly passes down throught the generations and vests in every newborn child if its skin is white. And since guilt deserves punishment (for whites anyway), today’s whites have to be punished for the ‘wrongs of the past’, allegedly committed by past whites against past blacks. It sounds racist, and it most certainly is, but pressure group ideology asserts that only white people can be ‘racist’, a blatantly racist assertion in itself. This is a great lurch backwards in social evolutionary time to an age before the concept of individual responsibility, to an age where tribal revenge, clan wars, and blood feud were the principle methods of achieving justice.
By the same token, feminists declare that the complementary cultural roles adopted by men and women over the past 10,000 years (men as breadwinners and soldiers, women as homemakers and mothers), were the outcome of a world-wide conspiracy by men to subjugate women and establish a ‘male dominated society’. Men today have to be discriminated against to ‘compensate for’ past discrimination against women. When this is described correctly as ‘reverse discrimination’, the feminists respond with accusations that ‘there have been 10,000 years of discrimination against women, and only 30 years of discrimination against men, so there’s still a long way to go before the score is settled’. This is plainly tribal revenge masquerading as ‘social justice’.
The dishonesty of these arguments is revealed by the fact that the bourgeois-Left, who use pressure groups to wage their relentless class war, refuse to hold their own members accountable for their actions in the present on the grounds that their behaviour is determined by social ‘causes’ beyond individual control: people are ‘products of society’. Yet while denying the possibility of self-responsibility in the present, the same ideologists proclaim that their class enemies can somehow be responsible for the actions of people in the past, who themselves supposedly were not responsible for their own actions in their own time.
It is significant that guilt for alleged past wrongs is never properly established in court of law with an opportunity for the accused to defend themselves. Past crimes are deemed to be ‘self-evident’. Furthermore, guilt for the past can never be atoned for. The slate can never be wiped clean. It is important that it remain a blank cheque on which the pressure groups can continue to write their own amounts, to be paid by taxpayers, forever, or at least until the society collapses.
The upshot of all this is that pressure groups can conduct their programme of social destruction aided and abetted by the law, and if members of the wider community try to protect themselves or their society, those members will be reprimanded or prosecuted before various tribunals set up to protect the interests of the pressure groups. As taxpayers they are forced to fund the destruction of their own community.
Neat.