AlternativeRight doesn’t endorse political candidates; however, James Russell of New York’s 18th District has my moral support. Jim is an honorable family man, and if that doesn’t disqualify him for office, his book The Germanization of Early Medieval Christianity proves that he’s far too literate and cultured to serve in the U.S. Congress.
The libertarians have Ron Paul, who actually understands economics and their issues; Jim Russell could be “our man” in Washington.
This said, I must take exception with the political tactics Jim has pursued over the past month, and I think that his mistakes could be used as a “teachable moment” for other alternative candidates who dissent from the state religion of multiculturalism and Lysenkoism.
Writing in The Occidental Quarterly [PDF] in 2001, Russell argued points that would, no doubt, appeal to many Italian ethnics in his district:
One wonders how a child’s sexual imprinting mechanism is affected by forcible racial integration and near continual exposure to media stimuli promoting interracial contact. The most serious implication of human sexual imprinting for our genetic future is that it would establish the destructiveness of school integration, especially in the middle and high-school years. One can only wonder to what degree the advocates of school integration, such as former NAACP attorney Jack Greenberg, were conscious of this scientific concept. It also compounds the culpability of media moguls who deliberately popularize miscegenation in films directed toward adolescents and pre-adolescents. In the midst of this onslaught against our youth, parents need to be reminded that they have a natural obligation, as essential as providing food and shelter, to instill in their children an acceptance of appropriate ethnic boundaries for socialization and for marriage.
Russell was, as a matter of course, accused of “racism” by all sides, including the Republican Party, which tried to remove their own candidate from the ballot. All of this was entirely predictable and unavoidable.
Russell’s mistake came in his response, which is outlined in the video below.
Russell should be commended for not offering some whimpering apology and promise to pray to Rev. Sharpton for forgiveness. He was misguided, however, in claiming to be outraged by the “defamatory” charge of “racism” and “anti-Semitism” and in suing his opponent and others in the media for libel.
First off, winning a libel suit in the United States is exceedingly difficult; if you’re a public figure, as candidate Russell most definitely is, it’s nearly impossible. Moreover, if the case actually goes to court, the burden of proof would be on Russell to prove that he’s not a racist, and, worse, the defendants could demand discovery of private emails and correspondence and much else. There’s also the matter of the time and money that Russell would spend prosecuting his enemies.
It’s likely the case will be thrown out, and for Russell’s sake, I hope it will be, for if it went to trial, our man is likely to loose. Whatever one thinks of the paragraph quoted above, it would, without question, be considered “racist” by state and federal judges as well as most all juries of Russell’s peers.
More important, Russell’s response was demoralizing. Much like GOP and conservative movement morons get up in arms over any insinuation of “racism,” and then bend over backwards to prove how much they love Martin Luther King and the rest of it, Russell is, in essence, legitimizing the “racist” charge by forwarding a libel action.
If I were Russell’s press secretary, here’s the response I would have written for him:
The word “racist” has be thrown around so recklessly these past few decades that I doubt it still holds any meaning whatsoever. The Tea Parties are, reportedly, “racist,” voting Republican is “racist,” opposing immigration, disagreeing with Barack Obama, desiring race-blind admissions and hiring, watching NASCAR -- Racist! Racist!! RACIST!!!
If the liberal media is to be believed, at least half the country is a bunch of crazed racists.
People can read what I wrote and decide for themselves.
But let me put it this way, if it's "racist" to take an interest in whom your children associate with -- or in allowing New York parents to make sure their sons and daughters are exposed to the right sort of folks -- well then, I guess I’m a "racist"!