The following text is an extract from chapter four of Survival of the Species, a Racial-Nationalist novel by C. Stewart, wherein the concept of the "White Guilt Complex" is discussed.
The multiracialists painted their ideology, their views, as "nice"; advocating "diversity" and "tolerance". But the opposite was the case. What the multiracialist ideology sought was destruction: to destroy the Australian way of life with multiculturalism, to destroy the Australian People with Asianisation, to destroy the entire White Race with multiracialism. And, even if the multiracialists did or didn't realise it, if the White Race was destroyed, it meant the eventual demise of Western Civilisation as well.
Turning the world's population into an amorphous brown mass, with no racial differences, was in fact the very antithesis of diversity, but the liberal-internationalists were too bigoted and too blind to be able to see the long term consequences of their actions. The logical consequence of a world-state, with mass interactive migration and mass media communication, would be the creation of a world-wide culture and a world-wide mongrel people; hence, no more distinctive racial or cultural diversity. However, the globalists could not see past their noses to such a future - a future that would expose them as both idiots and hypocrites.
As for "tolerance", while the liberal-internationalists were "tolerant" of all kinds of perverts, as well as of any weird ethnic customs, they were hugely intolerant of anyone who was opposed to their world-view, and would stop at nothing destroy such opposition, whether it was to arrange boycotts to destroy someone's business, trying to get someone sacked, character assassination via the media, or outright violence - these so-called "liberals" were more intolerant than any bigot they ever portrayed on their TV soap operas. Various liberals and academics, who - with a "holier than thou" attitude - prided themselves on their belief in "free speech" and "free discussion", would become as reactionary as the most jack-booted Bolshevik thug if anyone dared attack their "sacrosanct" globalist opinions. It was truly a case of "free speech for me, but not for thee".
Multiculturalist liberalism is an ideology that is more oppressive than the tyranny of communism or fascism, but more cleverly so. It dresses itself up as a "reasonable" ideology, and paints its opponents as extremist, racist, mad, or downright evil. In liberal-run education systems, liberalism is not portrayed as just one of many ideologies, but as "the norm", against which there is no "reasonable" alternative. Yet, liberalism is far from reasonable; it uses social, political, legal, and physical force against its opponents. Just as in the Soviet Union or in Nazi Germany, dissidents against the liberal-internationalist System are threatened first with social ostracism and loss of their jobs, then with physical violence and/or imprisonment. Anyone promoting ideas of nationalism or racial realism is considered to be a "heretic", and hence dangerous to the System. Just as happened to Galileo and Solzhenitsyn, Nationalists in many Western countries are thrown into jail for promoting or publishing ideas considered "dangerous" by the State. Many Nationalists have been imprisoned, not for carrying out violent acts, or even threatening violence, but simply for publishing their opinions on the inequality of races, or for opposing non-White immigration and multiracialism.
The hypocrisy of the liberal-internationalists was clearly self-evident to anyone who opened their eyes. If an Abo were to say "I'm Aboriginal, I'm proud of it, and I want my race to survive", he would be cheered; if a Negro were to say "I'm African, I'm proud of it, and I want my race to survive", he would be applauded; if an Asian were to say "I'm Chinese, I'm proud of it, and I want my race to survive", he would be congratulated; but if a White were to say "I'm White, I'm proud of it, and I want my race to survive", he would be attacked, vilified, and demonised - "You evil racist" the globalists would shout, "how dare you promote White supremism and hatred!", and many of them would demand that the "racial heretic" be fined or jailed.
So, why the different reactions? Basically, it is because multiracialist liberal-internationalism is an anti-White ideology, inclusive of much anti-White hatred and self-hatred.
The globalists were relentless in their advocacy of multiracialism, demanding a Eurasian Australia, or promoting their aim of the entire earth populated by a raceless "brown man" - the whole world's population consisting entirely, and only, of "coffee coloured people by the score".
What sort of evil was this? What sort of sick, bitter, or twisted minds would seek to destroy their own People? Who would promote an ideology that advocated the disappearance of their own Race?
It was apparent that this self-destructive psychosis was the child of liberalistic internationalism, which had further spawned the infamous White Guilt Complex. In essence, the idea behind the White Guilt Complex was that the Whites had the most money and highest standard of living in the world, whilst the coloured races had little money or comforts, and that the Whites had exploited the "poor coloureds".
The White Race had built a privileged place for itself in the world, and for that it was to be condemned by the forces of liberal-internationalism. The globalists often made plaintive cries about the historical utilisation of the mud races by Whites (actually, such utilisation was usually carried out by big-business interests, rather than by the common White people). Although it should be acknowledged that Whites had benefited from much mule-work that had been carried out by non-Whites at the behest and direction of Whites ("Oppression and exploitation" cry the globalists - mind you, the Whites simultaneously culturally and economically advanced such mud nations, and slashed the muds' adult and infant death rates), at the same time it should also be acknowledged that White civilisation would have advanced without it anyway.
Probably more to the point was that White people generally enjoyed a better standard of living than did non-Whites; that while Whites were enjoying abundant food, entertainment, and technology (all of which were a product of White Civilisation) there were Africans and Asians that were starving to death - and this made the globalists feel guilty (especially those in the high income areas of the Traitor Class), bringing upon them the classic White Guilt Complex, leading to racial self-hatred and the anti-White stance of liberal-internationalists. Hence the anti-White double-standard.
Of course, it was never mentioned that the Whites had a higher standard of civilisation even before they began colonisation in Asia and Africa. Heaven forbid that one would compare the differing productive and intellectual capacities of different races - or, at least, the globalists would forbid it. Nor was it ever mentioned that the mud races attained a higher standard of living via the Whites, nor was it mentioned that whenever the Whites gave control of a country over to the coloureds that it would usually either decline in overall standards (becoming very corrupt, chaotic, and often barbaric), or become some sort of authoritarian banana republic. Yet, even with self-governing Third World countries, everything was somehow painted as the fault of the Whites.
One of the best guilt-inducing tactics used by the globalists was that relating to slavery, particularly useful in ideologically bludgeoning American Whites, but it was often extended as a guilt trip to Whites of all nations. Of course, it was never mentioned that the Blacks in Africa had enslaved other Blacks for centuries before the Whites had ever taken any African slaves to America, also that the American slave trade depended on buying Black slaves from other Black Africans (as well as which, the Arabs were very active in the slave trade). Nor was it mentioned that slavery used to be a common thing, practiced by all races. Indeed, there were many Whites who were used as slaves - many were sold into servitude in America; as well as which, during the Industrial Revolution, not only were White children sent down into the coal mines, but many were chained to machinery in factories to keep them at work (The Forgotten Slaves: Whites in Servitude in Early America and Industrial Britain, by Michael Hoffman, was very instructive in this little-taught area of White slavery). Also, many free American Blacks later owned slaves; between 1830 and 1860, there were 3,500 Black slave owners who owned over 10,000 Black slaves; they owned plantations alongside White slave owners, they often ran adverts in the papers trying to locate their "runaways", and kept journals which showed they treated their slaves no differently than White slave owners. It should not be forgotten that it was, in fact, the Whites who did the most to put an end to the bulk of the slave trade - even though this was a trade being practiced by all races. Nor should one forget the "White slave trade" of modern times, whereby Whites - White women in particular - are kidnapped into slavery for slave masters in the Middle East and North Africa. Nowadays, there is much slavery still in existence, however, the bulk of the slave industries are to be found in Asia, where multiple generations would work for the same master, family, or company - there still exists tens of thousands of slaves in the Third World. One historian noted that "There was nothing uniquely Western or uniquely White about slavery, only the abolition of slavery is Western!"
The White Guilt Complex was something maintained and extended by biased educators and the media, both of which kept the White masses in ignorance of the relevant history and facts; continually suppressing inconvenient facts and views, and airing only those views that were suited to their liberalistic ideology (so much of the globalists' brainwashing propaganda was put about via the medium of entertainment - through television and cinema). It was up to all Whites to escape from the clutches of this insidious liberalistic brainwashing, and free themselves from the mental chains that bound them.
Source: C. Stewart. Survival of the Species, Southern Destiny Publications, third edition, January 2001, http://www.freespeech.org/white/survival
bravenet.com