Obama’s Presidency will end up as much of a disappointment as Tony Blair’s leadership did in Britain.
Nick Griffin assesses the significanceof Obama’s Presidential victory. — An outgoing Republican Presidentleaves behind him an American economy in free fall, and a Democrat winsthe race to replace him. No surprise in the USA then.
Obama’s inevitable victory was againsta liberal puppet of the plutocrats whose greed has wrecked the economynot just of America but of the entire world. This is not the result ofsome zeitgeist change in the USA that heralds a bright new leftist dawnof peace and harmony under a brilliant new leader who will heal illsjust by touching the afflicted.
Obama was elected because McCainrepresented the party which Americans blame for turning the cashwithdrawal machines they called houses into giant millstones of everincreasing debt and despair. While Obama’s undeniable charisma andbrilliant Internet campaign played an important role in his victory, inthe end this was not so much about the Democrats winning as it was amatter of the Republicans losing.
McCain’s poll ratings tracked the DowJones stock market index and he was doomed when he stated that thefundamentals of the American economy were sound on the very day thatBear Sterns collapsed. That’s all there is to it. The Obama halo isrelative to his opponent, and within weeks of his not having anopponent that halo will begin to lose its lustre.
And so it should. Because, unnoticed byAmericans — or rather, unreported by the liberal-left media — BarakObama played a key role in the creation of the sub-prime disaster thathas propelled him to power. The disaster started when a ‘communityorganizer’ in Chicago named Madeline Talbott began to use the 1977Community Reinvestment Act to build her political influence among thecity’s black community.
The CRA itself was a piece of bankstergreed dressed up as PC folly. The politicians who passed it thoughtthey were voting to make it easier for poor people — minoritiesespecially — to get mortgages despite having bad credit ratings. Thebanksters who wanted it passed wanted to be relieved of theinconvenient shackles of prudence that prevented them from gettinganother huge tranche of US society into unrepayable and hence highlyprofitable debt.
Talbott made a lucrative career out ofsuing or threatening institutions over real or perceived‘discrimination’ against blacks, and the CRA gave her the opportunityto take them to the cleaners. She set up a direct action campaigngroup, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now(ACORN) and set about intimidating various banks into giving loans topoor blacks — and out of court settlement payouts to her.
She was greatly helped in this when shehooked up with a slick and highly capable young community activist inChicago, who she hired to train her ACORN agitators. Her new friend,one Barak Obama, taught them confrontational tactics learned fromvarious 1960s Black Power activists he idolised (his favourite wasMalcolm X), and secured campaign money from the left-philanthropicWoods Fund.
This helped ACORN secure its greatesttriumph, when Talbott in 1993 persuaded US mortgage giant Fannie Mae toroll out a $55 million national pilot programme to give mortgages topeople with “troubled credit histories”. The rest, as they say, ishistory — except for the suffering yet to be endured by untold millionswhose lives are going to be savaged by the Second Great Depressioncaused when the banksters/black agitators’ boom went bust.
Still, the McCain camp were too PC, andtoo heavily implicated in the disaster themselves, to raise these factsas a campaign issue. Obama’s role in its genesis is now academic, aswill be his handling of it now that he’s in charge, because the ‘UScentury’ is over in any case. The American economy has been gutted anddestroyed by decades of free trade suicide, and there is nothing inObama’s policy pronouncements to suggest he can change this.
The place that took over fromBirmingham and Britain as the high tech workshop of the world now hasan economic profile more akin to a Third World country, with the exportof minerals, food and other raw materials being more important than theexport of finished manufactured goods. For a decade now, the USA hasracked up enormous debts and sold off vital assets in order to financea lifestyle its increasingly unproductive population enjoyed as theworld’s ‘consumers of last resort’.
As a direct result of this free tradelunacy, the economic leadership of the world has been handed on a plateto the Far East, and the United States is now an economic basket case.
At the same time, imperial over-reachin Iraq and Afghanistan has involved the USA in wars it cannot afford,which it cannot win, but withdrawal from which (as promised by Obama,and rightly so) will be a national humiliation.
Add to this the fact that mass Mexicanand Third World migration has set the USA on course to having itsEuropean-American founders become a minority in their own country by2040, and it is clear that, on top of seeing the end of the Americancentury, we are in fact witnessing the death of America as anythingother than a geographical expression.
The election of Barak Obama certainlywill in all probability speed this process up to some extent, but thelong-term historical trend was set years ago, and the question of whois in charge of rearranging the deckchairs on the US Titanic isactually of very little significance.
There is only one possibility of thisanalysis proving wrong: Operation Apollo. This is Obama’s proposal tospend vast sums of money in a crash programme to end America’s (andhence the West’s) deadly dependence on oil in general and MiddleEastern oil in particular.
If he actually has the stamina andpolitical skill to stand up to the vested interests that will opposethis (namely the oil companies and haulage lobbies who will not wantthis change, the banks which will want to finance things with fasterreturns, and the liberal welfare parasites whose living comes fromoverseeing hand-outs to the mainly black underclass), then Obama couldactually make a difference and become a significant historical figurefor good.
Unfortunately, he is far more likely toend up increasing handouts to those he sees as ‘his people’, and toblow the last American capital on alleviating the symptoms of America’senergy-starved decline than on addressing the problem itself.
If he does so, Obama’s Presidency will end up as much of a disappointment as Tony Blair’s leadership did in Britain.
Far from marking the end of race as afactor in American politics, that will end up polarising the place asnever before. Not that that is likely to benefit any white nationalistparty in America, as there is none, nor is there one upon the horizon.The place is a political disaster zone of self-indulgent juvenileextremism and lack of self-discipline.
Hence, when Obama does disappoint, thereaction will not produce anything worthwhile, but simply crude racistugliness. At its worst, a string of white supremacist nuts anddisgruntled ex-jarheads will be arrested plotting to assassinate him,and one will succeed, sparking not just pogroms but the legaliseddispossession of a white America paralysed by fear and guilt.
For at the very heart of Barak Obamathere is a deep-seated anti-white racism. Of course he disguised itduring his brilliant campaign, but it oozes from between the lines ofhis autobiography, Dreams from My Father. In this he tellshow he deliberately turned his back against his own multi-racialidentity in order to give himself a 100% black persona.
He lives with a ‘nightmare vision’ ofblack powerlessness. He seethes over injustices and prejudices that henever encountered. He detests his own white grandmother when she isfrightened by an aggressive black beggar. He is, in short, a trueracist bigot.
“Black people have reason to hate,”says Obama. He is, outwardly, a handsome man, but a deep and abidingugliness lurks within. He is an articulate man, but the problem is nothow the leader of a dying super -power sounds, nor even what he says;it’s what he does. We must of course wait to find out, but find out wewill.
The British National Party believes in telling the truth, even ifit is sometimes uncomfortable to hear or offensive to those who wouldrather bury their heads in the sand than face real problems in oursociety. But while we often pass quite critical comment on the impactof immigration, multi-culturalism and alien religions on the indigenouspeople of our lands, we have no animosity towards immigrants, theirdescendants or the followers of non-native religions. Nor do we intendto encourage others to feel such animosity, or believe that anything wehave to say is likely to ‘stir up hatred’ against anyone.
Infact, we believe that by providing a peaceful and Constitutional outletfor the anger and the frustration felt by millions of our people overthe undemocratic transformation of our country by our politicalmasters, the BNP actually defuses tensions. Where there is ‘hate’ weseek to turn it into righteous anger and political action against theonly people who deserve to be hated – the politicians who use our taxesto turn our country into a place where we often feel like strangers inour own land.