Just a few decades ago it was considered antisocial for a person to wear tattoos, in lands where the practice of tattoos is today commonplace. This was when the world was less thoroughly under the influence of Jewish degeneracy and corruption.

The following words rightly should be associated with tattooism: immoral, promiscuous, criminal, antisocial, atheistic, imprudent, and impulsive.

Jews promote tattoos because it stresses individuality. It tends to make him a rebel against society, similar to the atheism which the Jews are advocating among the masses. “To each person his own” – this is one of the major reasons for the Under-Man to seek tattooism. It is one of the most pernicious ideas that has affected mankind. For this reason the Jews are promulgating mongrelization among races, disregarding the racial average of each of the races and their differing physical, intellectual, and moral tendencies, insisting that there are no racial differences and that any differences which are to be found among humans must be indicative of environmental rather than genetic tendencies.

I suspect all morally sound persons sense a certain futility in tattooism. We sense that, in many cases, the tattoo is a mark of the inferior; because lacking a common purpose in society, he seeks an outward expression of rebellion against that society.

It would seem race has some role in the tendency towards tattooism. We would probably expect to find tattoos to be more common among the less provident races. However, it should be noted that every race also has its degenerate members. These degenerate members of the race are naturally more inclined to tattooism than the morally upright members of society. One characteristic unites these Under-Men of society – their immorality and degenerate nature.

Still, of course, quite a few degenerates exist whose skin is quite unmarred. Tattooism is not by any means a definitive marker of all Jewish degeneracy. But we can be certain that whenever we see tattooism, we see a greater tendency towards degeneracy.

It is perhaps also true that a few persons with tattoos are quite normal and respectable people. Above all, we would probably find those whose tattoos are associated with a military past to be fairly normal people, or at least not much different from the average. We must extend a more lenient judgment towards these veterans in our estimation of tattooism; yet as we go beyond the military, tattoos are bound to be associated further and further with a fellowship of degeneracy and of rebellion against the social order. A wretched scene!

Do I think tattooism should be banned? Perhaps. It is obvious that degeneracy will remain even if tattoos are banned. Perhaps some of these degenerately inclined people can be reformed through societal changes. But as much of this degeneracy is likely to be hereditary, it remains uncertain how much banning tattooism would put a reduction in degenerative tendencies. Some of these people probably can be reformed; most probably are naturally deviant and tattooism is simply an expression of this deviance, without which it would likely find expression in other proclivities. The Jews have through religious law banned the practice of tattooism among their followers. If the Jew, who is by nature a corrupt being, can forbid this practice among his tribe yet still remain the most corrupt and degenerate group on the planet, I am certainly not optimistic about the idea of banning tattooism in the attempt to inhibit asocial tendencies. Still, research must be done on the relationship between tattooism and degeneracy and the societal influences relative to other possible influences.

I ask my readers: How long must we tolerate the Jews corrupting our lands, before we choose, rightfully, to rise up against them and bring society to order? Given the Jewish state of the world today, will this ever even happen?