William Joyce
Chemotherapy for PC
Article spells out the case:
Right of Association by Christopher Donovan
As far as simple secular morality goes, I see no issue with one group of people voluntarily and non-violently disassociating themselves from others. Nothing is owed in either direction. No physical harm befalls anyone. Theft, cheating, deception, sexual impropriety, insults, trespass – none of the standard moral issues are implicated. A man who dates and is later rejected by a woman has zero moral claim against her: she has, however painfully to him, decided to move in another direction. She has chosen her own destiny. Nobody questions her decision. No lawyer files a lawsuit on his behalf, no editorials are written, no criminal charges filed, no inquest is held. It is simply the rhythm of freedom.
If there is a relationship comparison to the racial morass, it may be that of a couple needing a divorce. In securing the separation, there are tricky issues to be dealt with, and there are costs and adjustments made, most of which take getting used to. But the result – assuming a sound decision to get the divorce in the first place – is typically worth it. The white race needs a divorce.
There is simply no moral imperative for forced racial association. The current white morality, which holds whites responsible for every last primitive in the South American jungle and subsistence farmer in southeast Asia, is laughably incorrect. Moral regard should radiate outward in concentric circles, with immediate family first, race next, and others beyond that. Garrett Hardin recognized as much with his observation of “promiscuous altruism”. We currently have it backward: we consider the starving African child a more pressing issue than the fact that the white child doesn’t even exist because we refuse to marry and have children. The current state of multiracialism is due to a precious few – and transitory – factors: slavery and uncontrolled immigration. These are temporary and can be reversed. No human group has an unending right to the material support provided by any other group, yet this is the only notion supporting the rickety, rotten infrastructure of the forced multiracial society.
Right of Association by Christopher Donovan
As far as simple secular morality goes, I see no issue with one group of people voluntarily and non-violently disassociating themselves from others. Nothing is owed in either direction. No physical harm befalls anyone. Theft, cheating, deception, sexual impropriety, insults, trespass – none of the standard moral issues are implicated. A man who dates and is later rejected by a woman has zero moral claim against her: she has, however painfully to him, decided to move in another direction. She has chosen her own destiny. Nobody questions her decision. No lawyer files a lawsuit on his behalf, no editorials are written, no criminal charges filed, no inquest is held. It is simply the rhythm of freedom.
If there is a relationship comparison to the racial morass, it may be that of a couple needing a divorce. In securing the separation, there are tricky issues to be dealt with, and there are costs and adjustments made, most of which take getting used to. But the result – assuming a sound decision to get the divorce in the first place – is typically worth it. The white race needs a divorce.
There is simply no moral imperative for forced racial association. The current white morality, which holds whites responsible for every last primitive in the South American jungle and subsistence farmer in southeast Asia, is laughably incorrect. Moral regard should radiate outward in concentric circles, with immediate family first, race next, and others beyond that. Garrett Hardin recognized as much with his observation of “promiscuous altruism”. We currently have it backward: we consider the starving African child a more pressing issue than the fact that the white child doesn’t even exist because we refuse to marry and have children. The current state of multiracialism is due to a precious few – and transitory – factors: slavery and uncontrolled immigration. These are temporary and can be reversed. No human group has an unending right to the material support provided by any other group, yet this is the only notion supporting the rickety, rotten infrastructure of the forced multiracial society.