The Golden State
Foolish and cowardly policies
on immigration, welfare,
are destroying what was
an American paradise.
by Marian Evans
Of all the states in the union, California has probably had a more durable
and magical appeal for Americans than any other. Beginning with the gold
rush in 1849, and for more than a century thereafter, California has been
a beacon of promise and possibility. Blessed with a gentle climate, fertile
soil, and breath-taking scenery, California has for generations seemed
almost an earthly paradise.
California's future will not be like its past. The last several decades
have witnessed a tragic despoliation of the Californian paradise. Both
federal and state governments have set what could have been a shining outpost
of European civility on a sure course towards third-world squalor.
The Population Nightmare
The single greatest threat to California's future is its burgeoning
population. Thanks to waves of immigration and to high birth-rates among
immigrants after they arrive, the state is growing almost as quickly as
such developing countries as India and Brazil. Every year, there are about
700,000 more Californians, the vast majority of whom are non-white. Between
1920 and 1990 the state's population increased ten fold and now stands
at more than 31 million. At current rates of increase, there could be nearly
ten million more Californians by the year 2000 and yet another
ten million the decade after. The state is no longer the land of wide-open
spaces; about 200,000 people who would like to camp in state parks are
turned away every year because there is no room for them.
The population has not merely grown; it has changed. In the last 20
years, while the state's population increased by half, the number of Californians
on welfare doubled. During the same period the prison inmate population
Not coincidentally, the racial mix also changed dramatically. As recently
as 1970, California was 77 percent "Anglo," to use the currently fashionable
term that reflects the Hispanic perspective. By 1990, the white percentage
was down to 56 and dropping. In the same 20 years, the proportion of Hispanics
more than doubled from 12 percent to 26 percent, Asians went from four
percent to 10 percent, and blacks held steady at seven percent. By the
year 2000 whites will be a minority, at 48 percent, and by 2010, just 17
years from now, their numbers may have dropped below 40 percent.
Last year, 60 percent
of the babies born in California were Hispanic, black, or Asian.
Of course, in many parts of the state, whites are already a minority.
Los Angeles is only 40 percent white. Long Beach and San Jose are both
about 35 percent white, and Oakland, which is 44 percent black and 15 percent
Asian, is only 18 percent white. In towns like Huntington Park and Monterey
Park, fewer than half the residents were even born in the United
States, and a white face is a strange sight.
Immigration is just one of the reasons whites are becoming a minority.
During the 1980s, California received more than 2,300,000 legal immigrants
and unknown numbers of illegals, but once they arrive, non-whites have
more babies than native-born whites. Hispanics have the highest life-time
fertility figures of anyone, at nearly four children per woman. Blacks
are next with 2.5, Asians have 2.4, and white women have only 1.7 children
each. A fertility rate of about 2.1 children per woman is necessary in
order to maintain a population, so all of California's non-white populations
are growing naturally while the state's whites are failing to maintain
themselves. In 1992, 60 percent of the babies born in California were Hispanic,
black, or Asian. One third of all babies were illegitimate.
Interestingly, over the past several years, Hispanic fertility rates
in California have risen. According to some studies, Hispanics may
have more children when they come to the United States than they
would have had if they had stayed home. This reflects their improved circumstances;
welfare and Medicaid are more conducive to child-bearing than is the hard-scrabble
poverty of Mexico or El Salvador.
Non-white fertility rates are reflected in California's student population.
White children are already a minority of 45 percent in public schools.
In southern California, many schools are overwhelmingly non-white. In Los
Angeles County, two-thirds of all school children live in homes where English
is not spoken. Massive immigration coupled with third-world fertility rates
means that school enrollments will increase at more than two million every
decade. Just to keep up, California would have to build one new 650-student
school every day – for ever.
The huge recent influx of non-whites means that California has the largest
overseas population of many nationalities. More Mexicans, Koreans, Vietnamese,
and Filipinos live in California than in any place outside their homelands.
Fully ten percent of the population of El Salvador now lives in California.
At the same time, California has the highest concentration of certain nationalities
in the United States. Forty-three percent of America's Chinese live there
as do 52 percent of the Filipinos, 46 percent of the Vietnamese and 52
percent of the Hmong.
California is now such a babel of mutually uncomprehending peoples that
some San Jose gas pumps have "Please pay attendant before pumping" written
on them in five different languages. The application form for admission
to San Francisco City College offers 27 different choices for "Ethnic
Identity." It takes a bit of hunting to track down "White Non-Hispanic."
What is this mish-mash contributing to California? A Hispanic is 1.84 times
more likely to be on welfare than a white, an Asian is 1.89 times more
likely, and a black is 5.7 times more likely. Immigrants, no matter where
they are from, are 1.85 times more likely to be on welfare than whites.
The Hmong have been notably incapable of adapting their primitive tribal
ways to 20th century America. Years after they came to California, more
than half are still on welfare and few have bothered to learn English.
Nearly half of the state's 500,000 "refugees" are on welfare. Since 1970,
state money spent on the indigent just for medical expenses increased 20-fold
and is now greater than the gross national products of Nicaragua and Panama
The application form
for admission to San Francisco City College offers 27 different choices
for "Ethnic Identity."
There is ample reason to be on the dole in California. A family of three
gets $663 a month, tax-free, in addition to food stamps and subsidized
housing. That same family would need to earn $1,300 a month in order to
have the same after-tax income it gets for doing nothing. California now
spends $14 billion a year on welfare and free medicine.
Like virtually all other states, California offers public education
and welfare to illegal aliens. It would be interesting to know what goes
through the mind of a Mexican who discovers that it is possible to walk
across the border and become a permanent guest of the people of California.
Often, it is pregnant women who cross the border, since the children
they bear on American soil automatically become U.S. citizens. This accounts
for why 66 percent of the 44,000 births in Los Angeles County hospitals
in 1991 were to mothers who were illegal aliens. The medical costs of delivery
alone were more than $28 million, and since nearly all of these new American
citizens were indigent at birth they immediately went on welfare. Of course,
it is their mothers who receive the checks, and though they are themselves
in the country illegally it is a delicate matter to deport the mother of
an infant American. In Los Angeles County alone, over 200,000 citizen-children
of illegal aliens are collecting welfare. Of the 2.8 million Californians
on welfare – a figure equal to the population of Oregon – approximately
one third are thought to be illegal aliens.
A slightly larger proportion of the people getting free medicine in
California are probably illegals. Courts have forbidden hospitals to inquire
about the legal status of patients, even for expensive, long-term treatments
like kidney dialysis. Dialysis is virtually unobtainable in many Central
American countries, so patients are especially eager to come to California.
Los Angeles County is slowly waking up to how expensive it is to play
host to millions of illegals. The county alone spent $276 million on services
for illegals in 1991 and the federal government kicked in another $140
million. Part of the expense is for criminal processing. Four hundred illegal
aliens enter the California prison system every month. Illegals commit
over half the murders in Orange County and one third of the rapes and murders
in San Diego County.
The economic structure that supports this massive system of services
and give-aways is breaking down. In 1990, there were 6.21 California taxpayers
for every welfare recipient. Ten years later, the ratio was projected to
be fewer than three to one. Part of the reason for this change is
that in 1992 and 1993, hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants who
were granted amnesty under the 1986 immigration law became or were to become
eligible for welfare payments. As part of their amnesty applications they
were obliged to show that they were not public charges, but now that the
processing period is over they are free to go back on the dole.
Welfare is only part of the burden that taxpayers must shoulder. The
broader dependent population of California includes prisoners, non-working
students, retired people, and consumers of state-funded medical care. Currently,
California has only 1.2 taxpayers for every recipient of tax dollars. By
the end of the 1990s, there are likely to be only 0.8 taxpayers for every
All this puts terrible pressure on the state's finances. While the charity
budget climbs, the traditional functions of government wither. Although
travel on California's highways has more than doubled since 1970, the number
of miles of highway lanes have gone up only 15 percent. In the 1950s and
1960s, before "social" programs tore such a large hole in state spending,
20 cents out of every state dollar was spent on capital projects like roads
and canals. By the 1980s, it was only five cents, and most of that money
was borrowed. Now, in a state-by-state ranking of spending per person on
highways, California is dead last. The once-fabled California freeways
are a clogged morass of frustration and ill-temper.
By 1992, the state had an $11 billion deficit, and in July, Moody's
downgraded its bonds. This added $113 million to the year's interest expenses.
For part of the summer, while the legislature was trying to pass a budget,
California ran out of money and started paying its employees in IOUs. The
state was ready to consider nearly any proposal to save money, so long
as it was not a "racist" measure that would deny benefits to illegals.
It very nearly decided to raise the age at which children would be admitted
to kindergarten, which would have saved $325 million.
California will soon go broke if it continues its prodigal policies
of give-aways to all comers, and Governor Pete Wilson was once actually
brave enough to suggest that immigration is part of the problem. This idea
was hooted down by Hispanic groups and liberal editorialists, and in any
case, immigration is a federal matter over which no single state has control.
Even if immigration were to stop tomorrow, the state has become a volatile
ethnic mix that could ignite at any time.
The concluding part of this article examines growing racial tensions
in California and describes the solution that increasing numbers of whites
• • • BACK
TO TOP • • •
The Critics Find
Much to Criticize
Paved With Good Intentions, the bare-knuckles account of race
relations by the editor of American Renaissance, has slowly been
gaining critical attention. Some reviewers have clearly been baffled by
the book-impressed by its careful research and relentless logic but unwilling
to accept its conclusions.
the Wall Street Journal (Nov. 30, 1992) called the book "easily
the most comprehensive indictment of the race-conscious civil rights policies
of the past three decades." It then went on to complain that it "too easily
dismisses the continuing impact of racism, which most blacks face every
day of their lives," and concluded that the book will do very little to
The Forward (Dec. 4, 1992), the national Jewish newspaper based
in New York, appeared to be even more confused. On the one hand, it wrote
that the book's "straight talk suggests hope of an exhilarating breakthrough:
a chance to move on finally toward a more accurate diagnosis." The paper
also called the book a "deep and powerfully damning indictment of the way
that most Americans have come to think about race."
Despite all this, the Forward concluded that "it's hard to imagine
that it will spur much rethinking," because of such flaws as its "smug
tone and blatantly sloppy arguments." The reviewer offered no examples
"The most scurrilous
work about blacks since Thomas Dixon's 'The Clansman'."
The Baltimore Sun (Nov. 23, 1992) had no mixed feelings about
the book at all; it hated it. This is how its reviewer paraphrased the
book's thesis: "American race relations have gone to hell in a hand basket,
and it's all the fault of those horrible, horrible Negroes." He accused
the book of "indulging in racist statements" and "Dixie-bashing," and called
it "the most scurrilous work about American blacks since Thomas Dixon's
Clansman was published in 1905."
A black reviewer for the Detroit Free Press (Nov. 8, 1992) called
the book a "mean-spirited tirade" and warns that its "relentlessly bitter
tone . . . serves as a warning of troubles ahead" because so many whites
are likely to agree with it. The Free Press did not dismiss it out
of hand, however. It went on to say, "Some might denounce Taylor as a bigot
– perhaps even a genocidal one – but it's not that simple. For all the
spite and anger in his arguments, there's an uncomfortably large portion
The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette (Oct. 18, 1992) published what
has been the most unemotionally factual review so far. It describes the
book's central arguments and discreetly applauds what it sees as an effort
to open an honest discussion of racial questions. One Arkansas man read
the review, bought the book, and then ordered 50 more copies.
So far, only one reviewer has really understood what the book sets out
to do. Writing in the Jan. 18, 1993 issue of National Review, Peter
Brimelow says this: "The single greatest strength of Jared Taylor's Paved
With Good Intentions is its massive and merciless crushing of this
type of hysterical denial [of the facts], which currently paralyzes all
discussion of race relations in America. Considered entirely by itself,
this achievement makes his book the most important to be published on the
subject for many years." Mr. Brimelow also recounts the central arguments
of the book and even includes a frank account of the horrors of anti-white
crime committed by blacks. This is the only review so far that has been
more than tepid – and it is openly enthusiastic.
William F. Buckley has not yet bothered to read the book, but he cribbed
from National Review to write a recent column. Mr. Buckley called
the book's thesis "bizarre," but then went on to repeat, word for word,
some of the arguments that the National Review article found most
convincing. Perhaps Mr. Buckley meant "startling" rather than "bizarre."
Samuel Francis, who also mentioned the book in his syndicated column,
has obviously read it. He called Paved With Good Intentions "a shattering
new book," and quoted from it at some length on anti-white crimes and on
the decline in white racial consciousness that accounts for the media silence
about such crimes.
In some respects, it is a small miracle for so heterodox a book to have
been published and to get any critical notice at all. Of course, the New
York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Boston Globe, Chicago Tribune,
San Francisco Chronicle and virtually every other paper have ignored
it. The New York Times Book Review, which is probably the single
most influential books publication in the country, has also ignored it.
Presumably, these papers think the silent treatment is the most effective
weapon against dangerous ideas.
"The most important
book to be published on the subject for many years."
Talk radio, which reflects the views of Americans far more closely than
either television or newspapers, has been more receptive. A blizzard of
talk shows – sometimes as many as six in one day – has informed listeners
in some parts of the country about the book. Television, however, has kept
at a safe distance.
A very gratifying number of AR readers have bought the book directly
from us, and many have sent complimentary letters in return.
• • • BACK
TO TOP • • •
Life Along the Fault Line
An unblinking look at racial friction
in an American city.
reviewed by Thomas Jackson
Despite the official lip service that Americans pay to racial integration,
most whites live far away from underclass blacks and are glad they do.
However, in a multi-racial society, some whites will, inevitably live along
the racial fault lines. Even middle-class whites sometimes live close to
the ghetto and share parks and sidewalks with underclass blacks. How does
this change the texture of life?
Street Wise: Race, Class, and Change
in an Urban Community
University of Chicago Press, 1990, 279
pp., $11.95 (paperback)
Street Wise, a fascinating account of just how powerfully race
affects life the city, is the result of more than ten years of careful
observation of how the races deal with each other. The author of this remarkable
study, Professor Elijah Anderson of the University of Pennsylvania, is
black. He moves freely among whites but can also study an underclass world
that is off limits to whites. He holds a conventional, liberal view of
American race relations, but he faithfully reports what he finds, even
when it contradicts that view.
never mentions the name of the city he studied, but it is probably Philadelphia.
He writes mainly about a part of town, which he calls the Village, that
was rediscovered by whites in the 1960s and is slowly becoming gentrified.
Along with the attractions of its gracious old houses and convenience to
the city center, the Village has a serious drawback that keeps gentrification
in check: It borders on a black slum, which Prof. Anderson calls Northton.
In the 1950s, Northton was a well-kept, black working-class neighborhood,
in which illegitimacy and welfare were thought to be deeply shameful. However,
when housing in the suburbs became available to successful blacks they
fled Northton and it is now home to all the underclass failings of crime,
poverty, illegitimacy, welfare, and drugs. The working-class blacks who
still live in Northton despise the underclass, though they do not use that
term; instead, they talk about "street niggers," "lowlifes," and "pipers"
(people who smoke crack pipes).
Welfare and Illegitimacy
The underclass thrives amidst welfare and illegitimacy. As Prof. Anderson
explains, the young men of Northton take pride in fathering babies by different
mothers and in doing nothing to support them. Sexual conquest and the deceit
it requires are central to their lives, and the more blatantly they can
exploit women the higher their status among other men. Marriage is the
ultimate defeat. As Prof. Anderson writes, "If he [a young black] admits
paternity and 'does right' by the girl, his peer group likely will label
him a chump, a square, or a fool."
The young women long for marriage but console themselves with babies,
and there is much rejoicing over a new-born child no matter how desperate
the mother's circumstances. Teenage girls treat their babies like dolls,
to be clothed as expensively as possible and paraded around the community.
Mothers gain status if they have good-looking, light-skinned babies that
other girls admire.
However, once a child is no longer a cute toddler, the mother is likely
to lose interest in it and have another doll-baby to clothe and exhibit.
Consequently, as soon as they can walk, many children in Northton grow
up with virtually no adult supervision.
The presence of young
black man always means potential danger.
Occasionally, if a woman can prove paternity she will sue the father
for support. This is called "getting papers" on a man, or "going downtown
on him" and makes sense only if the man has a real job. A man may therefore
avoid work because he knows how many women would "go downtown" on him and
how little would be left of his pay check.
For both men and women in Northton, a baby and the welfare income it
brings are economic staples. On "mother's day," when the checks arrive,
fathers appear and try to share the temporary wealth. As Prof. Anderson
explains, "In cold economic terms a baby can be an asset . . . . [W]omen
receive money from welfare for having babies, and men sometimes act as
prostitutes to pry the money from them." Welfare is what fuels this vicious
cycle of reckless procreation, but Prof. Anderson refrains from
Crack cocaine has had an appalling effect on Northton. People lie about
in filth on the floors of crack houses smoking pipes and jabbing themselves
with needles. Neighbors line up with television sets, stereos, food stamps,
and anything else drug dealers accept in exchange for drugs. Women may
wear no underwear so they can have quick sex in exchange for money or crack.
These emaciated, glassy-eyed "crack whores," are universal objects of contempt,
and drug dealers take pride in having dragged them down. They joke about
stuck-up girls who refused them sex in high school but who are "now doing
everything in the book."
The Color of Crime
Along with the drugs has come a huge crime wave and crime has a distinctive
face. Everyone in Northton and in the Village – black and white, young
and old – is afraid of young black men. They are a hostile, unpredictable
element and their presence in a public place always means potential danger.
Even young blacks recognize the menace. This is how one describes how he
acts in the street:
"I watch my back. I observe everything, look in the bushes. . . . I
never cross the street when I see dudes [other black men] coming . . .
. When you cross the street, that means you're scared or you
can't fight. . . . If someone bump into me on purpose, I keep on rollin'."
Just as Arabs did in uninhabited deserts and Medieval men-at-arms did
in periods of lawlessness, young blacks have developed a set of greetings
that are used to gauge hostile intent. At night, there is something like
the military's "rules of engagement," that govern chance encounters with
unknown blacks. It is important not to approach too quickly or come too
close, to appear to be following someone, etc. Even the author, much as
he decries "racial stereotyping," describes the elaborate avoidance procedure
he used when he found himself alone in the street at 3:00 a.m. with an
Black women in Northton structure their lives around fear of crime.
If they buy a new appliance, they do it in secret. They may then cut up
the cardboard box it came in and put it out with the garbage piece by piece.
This way no one will see the box and think there is something worth stealing
in the house.
Other women deliberately ingratiate themselves with teen-age neighbors
by baking cakes for them or giving them candy. They wear their purses under
their coats and wear no jewelry. If they are approached by a group of young
blacks they will pretend to know some of them, and greet them with
shouts of "Have you seen your sister?" or "How's Bea?"
Ploys like this do not work for white women, who are helpless prey.
Young blacks know very well how much fear they inspire and sometimes feign
an assault only to laugh uproariously when whites cower in terror. Some
whites carry "mugger's money" so they will have at least a few dollars
to give up; thugs who find no money on their victims have been known to
When it comes to street encounters between whites and blacks, explains
Prof. Anderson, "blacks have the upper hand." They know that whites will
run rather than fight. Blacks have the reputation of being willing to kill
a man if provoked, so they can always make a white back down. As a result,
Prof. Anderson, "the white male is not taken seriously
on the streets . . . ."
Since whites are weak and despised, many young blacks taunt and insult
then when they meet whites in public. One generalized insult to all whites
is to walk down the sidewalk with a boom box blaring loud rap music. It
is a way for blacks to claim the entire area within earshot as their turf.
In the Village, impotent whites submit to this humiliation whereas if anyone
walks though Northton making a noise, locals are likely to beat him up
and break his radio. Whites are the best targets for robbery, since
a black runs little risk of resistance or injury if he assaults one. Interestingly,
the only thing that changes the balance of power between black and white
is a dog. Almost all blacks are reportedly afraid of dogs and give a white
with a dog the right-of-way. As Prof. Anderson says:
"In the working-class black subculture, 'dogs' does not mean 'dogs in
the house,' but usually connotes dogs tied up outside, guarding the backyard,
biting trespassers bent on trouble. . . . When they [working-class blacks]
see a white adult on his knees kissing a dog, the sight may turn their
stomachs – one more piece of evidence attesting to the peculiarities of
their white neighbors."
In both the Village and in Northton, it is taken for granted that danger
and hostility are one-way streets. As a black explains to Prof. Anderson,
he could take an apartment in the Village and no white would trouble him,
but a white who strays into Northton on a Saturday night is clearly in
Prof. Anderson points out that many Northton blacks are ashamed of the
reputation they have earned among whites. Some young men who understand
why whites fear them, may go out of their ways to be polite to whites during
chance encounters, and even explain that they are "not like that."
"Blaming the Victim"
Working blacks, who still believe in honesty and diligence, are more
openly contemptuous and unforgiving of underclass blacks than whites are.
To Prof. Anderson's chagrin, they are perfectly willing to "blame the victim":
"[T]here are a lot o' guys out there who just don't wanta work . . ." says
one man; "There's a different kind of black man today." A retired black
tells him, "I'm getting like some of the white folks do. I don't want to
be bothered with some of us neither."
Whites in the village struggle against "racism" and recount their own
muggings in earnestly race-neutral terms. Nevertheless, they learn to stay
off the streets not just at night but also in the afternoon when the high
school lets out. They learn elaborate evasion routines to avoid walking
past young blacks. They put bars on their windows and buy expensive burglar
alarms. Prof. Anderson finds that the new generation of yuppies is less
forgiving, less "sensitive" about race, but older whites still talk about
the benefits of diversity and wonder why they do not have more black friends.
Prof. Anderson concludes his book with a homily on how crime and racial
hostility will get worse unless the government spends more money, but his
heart does not seem to be in it. Elsewhere, he sums up the problem in the
following house-that-Jack-built manner:
"The yuppie who
is mugged and the [black] kid who does it; the old head [hard-working,
older black man] who loses the respect of the kid, who impregnates the
teenage girl, who goes on welfare, which raises taxes, which drives out
local companies, which causes unemployment, which causes homelessness,
which causes crime, which depresses property values and drives out middle-class
residents . . . ."
The whole dismal cycle begins with the young black who mugs the yuppie
and makes the teenager pregnant. Government wrote the welfare check that
helped bring the young black into the world in the first place. Government
spending will not reform him.
• • • BACK
TO TOP • • •
O Tempora, O Mores!
The Dread Hand of Racism
A recent report has found that many things are getting worse for children
in the state of Michigan. In just ten years all the following indices of
youthful misery have gone up: the teen-age birth rate by 22.5 percent,
the teen-age violent death rate by 27.6 percent, and the child poverty
rate by 36.7 percent. In the past decade, the number of children on food
stamps has risen by an astonishing 56 percent.
Richard Lerner, the director of the Institute for Children, Youth and
Families at Michigan State University, was involved in conducting the study.
He points out that blacks suffer from all these ailments more than whites.
A black child is nearly four times more likely to be in poverty than a
white, for example, though he did not elaborate on how much more likely
a black teen-ager was to have a baby or to be murdered.
"And why don't kids have equal life chances?" asks Mr. Lerner. He supplies
the answer in one word: "Racism."[Kenneth Cole, "Report: Minority Kids
Shortchanged," Detroit News, Nov. 18, 1992, p. B1.]
Devaluing America's Heritage
Robert Adams has been Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution since
1984, and has been unflagging in his attempts to correct "Eurocentric bias."
He has shut down several exhibits at the Museum of Natural History on the
advice of Helen Maddox, "Queen Mother" of Tu-Wa-Moja, an Afrocentric study
group. The Queen Mother explained to him that displays of the primitive
practices of non-whites were "racist." The museum now has "dilemma labels"
on many of the exhibits that are still open, which apologize for biases
Under Mr. Adams, American Indians are likely to get their own museum.
According to the Smithsonian, the museum's theme will be that Indian cultures
have "intrinsic validity and equality with other cultural experiences."
Mr. Adams has also launched plans to dismantle the Arts and Industries
Museum which, in 1881, was the first museum to be founded by the Smithsonian.
If plans go through, the building will be turned into the National African-American
Mr. Adams even
has designs on the National Air and Space Museum, which gets more visitors
than virtually any other museum in the world and is considered one of the
Smithsonian's greatest successes. Apparently its sin is that it is a tribute
to American bravery and ingenuity. Henceforth, the Smithsonian will take
"less of a celebratory approach." Mr. Adams prefers to examine airplanes
as "instruments of destruction," and has planned an exhibit entitled "From
Guernica to Hiroshima."[Matthew Hoffman, "Smithsonian caretaker a fox guarding
the hen house," Detroit News, Oct. 16, 1992, p. 10A.]
Crossing the Bar
The bar association of the city of New York has officially recommended
that the New York State bar exam be overhauled so that more non-whites
can pass it. The association admits that it has no idea just what it might
be about the exam that is biased against non-whites-it did not even bother
to look over a copy of the exam – but it is convinced that test bias is
a serious problem that must be corrected.
Ironically, the bar association does not even know what the disproportion
in white and non-white pass rates is because the Board of Law Examiners,
which administers the test, does not keep statistics by race. In fact the
examiners do not even keep records by name of applicant; in order to eliminate
any kind of bias in grading, each test paper is given a number so that
the results are scored anonymously. The New York City bar association says
all this is just a ruse by the examiners so they can avoid collecting statistics
by race that would show how biased the test really is.
The bar association has several reasons for thinking that non-whites
are more likely to fail. First of all, California keeps racial statistics
on pass rates and has found that first-time test-takers fail at the following
rates: blacks – 69 percent, Hispanics – 60 percent, Asians – 43 percent,
whites – 27 percent. New York State law schools informally reported to
the bar association that their graduates were failing the bar exam at about
What to do? The bar association considered recommending that the bar
exam be abolished. Short of that, it wants the exam systematically vetted
for "bias" and wants the Board of Law Examiners to hold training sessions
for applicants. But what it most wants are accurate racial statistics on
pass rates so it can monitor how "unfair" the examination is.[The Record
of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York, Vol. 47, No. 5,
June 1992, pp. 464ff.]
Of course, these statistics will only show that even after college and
law school, most blacks and Hispanics do not learn enough to pass the exam.
The next step would be to use racial statistics for a kind of "race-norming,"
so that a certain proportion of blacks is always given a passing grade
despite inadequate performance on the test.
Although 171 blacks were admitted to this year's freshman class at Harvard,
only 95 chose to attend. The admissions department decided to find out
why the other 76 went elsewhere. The most common reason was that Harvard
does not give all blacks full scholarships. Blacks from rich families have
to pay their own way just like white people. Other universities pick up
the tab for all blacks no matter how rich their parents, so those schools
are more attractive. Several of the blacks who turned down Harvard to get
full scholarships elsewhere came from families with incomes of more than
$100,000.[Affirmative Action Queens, Heterodoxy, Oct. 1992.]
First Things First
Somalia is reportedly unable either to feed itself or let foreigners
distribute food. This explains our current forced-feeding mission to that
country. Something Somalia does manage to do is import $100 million a year
worth of a plant called khat. Chewing khat leaves releases an amphetamine
stimulant favored by bandits and Somali
war lords. People are restless and irrational when they chew khat, and
there is always more shooting when the supply is good.
The best khat comes from Kenya, and must be flown in daily while it
is still fresh. A khat chewer may go through $6.00-worth in a day, which
could buy enough grain to feed six people for a week. At that rate, the
$100 million a year the country spends on khat could feed the estimated
3.6 million people of Somalia for about seven months.
Here They Come
One of the inevitable consequences of our military venture in Somalia
will be that large numbers of Somali "refugees" will end up in the United
States. The city of Chicago has gotten its first taste. A Lutheran group
spent more than $30,000 on air fare to fly in Hussein Hassan Mohamed, along
with one of his two wives, and 22 of his children (ages 4 to 36). The Lutherans
also bought clothes, food, and household goods for the Hassans, and rented
three apartments for them.
The Hassans speak little English and need a great deal of medical attention,
but appear to like their new home. "We'd like to stay here," Mr. Hassan
told a reporter. What about ever returning to Somalia? "I might go see
it and visit it," he says.
Here Come Some More
Anyone who doubts that the operations in Somalia will result in a flood
of "refugees" need only consider the case of Iraq. Twelve thousand of the
Iraqi soldiers captured during the Gulf War refused to be repatriated,
and another 17,000 fled the country in the aftermath of the war. Saudi
Arabia has built comfortable camps for these people but refuses to grant
them asylum and does not let them outside the camps. Ever the easy touch,
the United States has agreed to take 3,000 Iraqis under a resettlement
program that is expected to cost $21 million. Since tens of thousands are
still stuck in Saudi Arabia we can be sure that many more will eventually
come to America. If we end up with thousands of people with whom we were
at war, how many more will we take in of a people we are presumably trying
to rescue from starvation?
Up From the Projects
may be interested in a new book called Up From the Projects: Noteworthy
African Americans Who Once Lived in Public Housing. Included in this group
are Ohio congressman Louis Stokes and his brother Carl Stokes, who is a
municipal court judge in Cleveland. Football player Leonard Lyles, producer
Keenen Ivory Wayans, and Milwaukee School Superintendent Howard Fuller
are also reported to have once lived in public housing.[Betty Winston Baye,
When we leave our children behind, Louisville C-J, no date or page.]
Death to the White Man
The Pan African Congress (PAC) of South Africa has a simple way of seeking
"justice" for the past practices of apartheid: Kill all white people. George
Mpaya, head of the PAC youth movement explains that the strategy of elimination
will be "one settler, one bullet."
"They are not being attacked as whites per se," he explains; "They are
attacked as defenders of the apartheid system." The reasoning is that every
white over the age of six or seven has benefited unjustly from apartheid
and must therefore die. Mr. Mpaya concedes that some white South Africans
have opposed apartheid, but they are too few to worry about. "There is
no way we can punish ourselves by trying to search for one innocent person
out of a million people."
The only good white is a dead white. Five people were killed and 40
injured in the first two "operations," carried out in November and December.
Many more are promised.[Jerelyn Eddings, Enemies of the People, Louisville
C-J, Dec. 13, 1992, A21.]
'Twas the Season
In Chicago, employees of Montgomery Ward, readers of the Chicago Sun-Times,
and listeners to WBBM radio joined a campaign to buy and donate hundreds
of Christmas gifts to be given to poor children. Some of the gifts were
taken to a virtually all-black
school in the Cabrini-Green housing project, where 30 parents volunteered
to sort and arrange them for presentation to the children. During the sorting
session, parents unwrapped presents and took whatever they wanted, in a
scene that the school's principal, Marshall Taylor, described as "complete
Within 24 hours, Montgomery Ward found replacements for the 300 stolen
gifts.[New batch of gifts given school after looting by parents, Houston
Guarding the Border
Mexico has halted the import of second-hand clothing from the United
States because it claims that much of it is infected with herpes, syphilis,
and AIDS. It was news to American health officials that clothing could
catch herpes, but Mexican customs officials said they were barring entry
to tons of clothing as a health measure. Customs officials also conceded
that halting imports would help Mexican clothing manufacturers.[Reuters,
Mexico stops U.S. used clothes imports, Houston Chronicle, Dec. 25, 1992.]
Low Tide for the Ocean of Soul
It has been widely reported that the Texas Southern University (TSU)
marching band was disbanded after some of its members went on a $22,000
shoplifting spree during a trip to Japan. It was considerably less widely
reported that TSU is "historically black" and that the band, known as the
Ocean of Soul, is all black.
Tokyo shopkeepers, who scarcely ever suffer from shoplifting, take few
precautions against theft and sometimes even display merchandise on shelves
set up on the sidewalk. Even so, they were amazed at the brazenness of
band members who made off with VCRs, cordless telephones, and CD players.
Police held up the band's bus on the way to the airport and threatened
to detain it indefinitely if the stolen merchandise were not returned.
All but $3,200 of it then materialized. The police said they did not make
any arrests because the thieves could not be positively identified. Shopkeepers
said the bandsmen were dressed in matching outfits and all looked alike.
In a Dec. 17 editorial, the Houston Chronicle clucked over the damage
the band had done to the overseas image of blacks: "Their actions only
serve to confirm in the Japanese mind what they already think of black
people – that they are a troublesome lot of inferiors given to anti-social
behavior." Indeed, as one young Japanese woman told reporters, "I was surprised
to hear about the incident, but then I heard it was blacks . . . ." The
Japanese press also reported disapprovingly that the thieves showed no
remorse for what they had done.
Back in Texas, there was more huffing and puffing when an investigation
revealed that more than half of the 120 bandsmen who went to Japan were
not even TSU students. Nevertheless, one TSU alumna who is an activist
in Houston's Fourth Ward, could not understand what the fuss was about.
"No one was hurt; no one was lynched or burned," pointed out Gladys House;
"I just don't understand why a big issue is made out of this incident."
She blamed the furor on racism.[Houston Chronicle, Dec. 17 through Dec.
21. Best single source, Ken Marantz, Lure of 'better bargain' caught TSU
band, Houston Chronicle, Dec. 20, 1992, p. 1C.]
Progress in Baltimore
AR has long urged obligatory use of Norplant, the recently-approved
implantable contraceptive, for welfare recipients. It has also urged that
Norplant be made widely available at inner-city high schools. The city
of Baltimore is making encouraging moves in that direction. In January
it offered free implants to students at a special high school for students
who are pregnant or who have already had children. The plan is to extend
the program to other schools where there are many pregnancies.
last two years, other kinds of contraceptives have been available free
to all Baltimore high school students and to some junior high school students.
However, many girls forgot or didn't bother to use contraceptives and got
pregnant anyway.[Tamar Lewin, Baltimore school clinics to offer birth control
by surgical implant, NYT, 12/4/92, p. A1.] Once Norplant is inserted under
the skin, a woman is sterile for up to five years or until the implant
Now that free, absolutely reliable contraception is available to poor
blacks, it will be revealing to see how many still have babies and go on
welfare. If many still go on welfare, there will be more calls either for
the elimination of welfare or for obligatory use of Norplant.
Calling All Readers
We would like
to thank an anonymous reader in Seattle who sent an issue of AR to a local
radio talk show host. The host contacted us and Samuel Taylor was a guest
on the program. Talk radio is one of the few ways we have of telling people
about AR, and we are grateful to our Seattle reader for making the
If you see an article or a whole issue that you think might interest
people in your area, please send it to a talk show host. Conservative hosts
are most likely to respond, but all radio stations like controversy. They
all have facsimile machines, too, so they can contact us with no difficulty.
Please help us spread the word!
In December, the U.S. Census Bureau revised its population predictions
for the next century. Americans are having babies at a higher rate than
expected, and more immigrants are pouring in. Just three years ago, the
Bureau thought the U.S. population would take 41 years to gain another
50 million. Now, they figure it will take only 17 years, and we will be
at the 300 million mark by the year 2010. Since only 10 percent of immigrants
are white, and since whites have the lowest fertility rate of all races,
the Census Bureau calmly predicts whites will be a minority in a little
over 50 years.
Something else that lowers the percentage of whites is the fact that
most non-whites live longer than whites. Asians have a life expectancy
of 83 years. American Indians and Hispanics, who are essentially the same
race, live to be 78. The white life expectancy is 76 and that of blacks
is 70.[Ramon McLeod, U.S. Population in 2050 will be half minorities, Dec.
4, 1992, p. 1.] For years, the difference in black and white life expectancy
has been attributed to "racism." The fact that Asians and Hispanics outlive
whites doesn't fit well with the "racism" theory, and is scarcely ever
• • • BACK
TO TOP • • •
E T T E R S F R O M R E A D E
Sir – Congratulations on having written the best book on race relations
to be published in the past thirty years. Given today's political climate,
I suspect the book was received in most quarters with hostility, if not
outright neglect. A discussion of the publication, promotion, and reviews
of the book would make a very interesting article. In my opinion, the reception
and fate of this book are important auguries for the future of race relations.
Frederick Pereira, Great Neck, N. Y.
Please see the article on page 4.
Sir – I recently purchased Paved With Good Intentions, and greatly admired
its cogent summation of America's seemingly never-ending racial crisis.
However, I must express one complaint: you obediently label Orientals as
"Asians." Asia includes the Indian sub-continent; surely you were not talking
This is particularly annoying in light of your chapter on "Double Standards,"
in which you effectively spotlight the guilty white scramble to relabel
blacks in order to placate them. If AR can call the "physically challenged"
what they are – crippled – then surely Mongolians can be called Orientals.
Jeffrey Holmes, Arlington, Mass.
Sir – With reference to his letter of Jan. 1993, I share Mr. Mabrito's
concern over the burgeoning population of non-whites vis A vis whites.
However, I strongly disagree with his solution [of encouraging whites to
have more children]. The last thing this country and the world needs is
more people. We certainly cannot outbreed the non-whites and any attempt
to do so would only exacerbate the problem.
We must control our borders. All immigration, illegal and legal, must
be stopped. Also, we must change our welfare, housing, and tax laws so
as to stop subsidizing and encouraging indiscriminate breeding among the
most non-productive members of society.
I am not optimistic.
Bailey W. Norfleet, Woodlawn, Tenn.
Sir – I'm sorry to report a bad boo boo in your article about Prof.
Philippe Rushton's research on race and head size in the JanuaryAR. You
say that "the prestigious British journal, Science," reiected his research.
Science is American; Nature is British. Which was it? Your opponents do
not forget such errors!
Name Withheld, Santa Barbara, Cal.
Nostra culpa. It was the British journal, Nature that turned down
Prof. Rushton's study. – Ed
Sir – It seems to me that the January issue of American Renaissance
pushed further than ever into forbidden territory. The cover story seemed
to suggest that racial integration can never be expected to work, and the
book review was nothing short of a defense of eugenics and of William Shockley.
In just one issue you took on what are probably the two holiest cows in
America: the doctrine that "diversity" and integration are inevitable and
therefore wonderful; and the doctrine that all races are equally intelligent.
I believe I've already gotten a year's worth of excitement in the January
issue alone. What's next?
Paul Hardman, Bremerton, Wash.
Sir – I read with interest your Dec. 1992 account of Martin Luther KingDrew
Medical Center in Los Angeles and the difficulties blacks and Hispanics
face when there are no more whites left to pay the price for affirmative
action. You can't very well give non-whites special treatment when they
are the only people applying for jobs.
This reminds me of busing. The theory was that black children were suddenly
going to start doing first-rate work if they attended the same schools
as whites. Of course, when blacks showed up, many whites left. This made
busing advocates all the more desperate to send black children ever further
in pursuit of whites. One Los Angeles judge even ordered a school district
to get on with busing so as to "make the most efficient use of increasingly
scarce white students as possible." The idea seemed to be that if there
were enough white faces in the room everyone would get good grades.
Of course, it didn't work. The black-white gap in school performance
stayed the same, whether classrooms were integrated or not.
Affirmative action will run the same course. Just as they were pushed
out of public schools, whites are being pushed out by the employers – usually
local governments – that are the most fanatical proponents of affirmative
action. Try to find a white face in a Washington DC city government office
or at a Department of Motor Vehicles office in southern California. Eventually,
whites stop even applying for those j obs, and move away from the area.
All the jobs are then held by non-whites and government services, just
like the public schools, become abysmally bad.
This brings us back to Los Angeles. What person – of any race – would
go to a hospital with an all-black and Hispanic staff if he had any choice
in the matter?
Alex Coombs, Stockton, Cal.
• • • BACK
TO TOP • • •