Welfare: Who is on it
and How it Works
Welfare encourages reckless
and is a massive transfer
from whites to non-whites.
by Samuel Taylor
Of the dozens of ways that the government has found to take money from
people who work and give it to people who do not work, the best known is
Aid to Families With Dependent Children (AFDC). Although there are other
programs that actually spend more tax money on poor people, AFDC is what
is generally thought of as "welfare." A significant minority of recipients
are white. However, since whites are considerably less likely than any
other racial group to be on AFDC, welfare acts as a net transfer of billions
of dollars from whites to non-whites.
Americans are suspicious of government handouts to able-bodied adults,
so AFDC payments are supposed to be for the benefit of the children of
the indigent rather than for the indigent themselves. Eligibility is therefore
restricted to poor families with children under the age of 18. There is
a certain looseness about the definition, so virtually all AFDC "families"
are single women with children. In 5.2 percent of all welfare cases, the
other parent is dead or incapacitated, and 33 percent of the time the other
parent is absent because of divorce or separation. Fifty-six percent of
the time, however, the mother did not bother to get married at all. Thus,
in more than half of all welfare cases, money goes to women who started
"families" when they had illegitimate children.
Variations by State
Welfare varies considerably from state to state and, theoretically,
a state is free not to have AFDC at all. Currently, all 50 states and the
District of Columbia, along with Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands
have AFDC but, curiously, American Samoa does not. The enticement to the
states and territories to take part in AFDC is that the federal government
pays half of the local administration costs and, depending on how poor
the state is, anywhere from 50 to 80 percent of the benefit payments themselves.
There is one welfare
recipient for every six or seven taxpayers.
The states set their own eligibility standards and benefit levels. The
only restriction is that federal law prohibits payments to households with
incomes that are more than 185 percent of the poverty standard set by the
state. In some states, the standard is very simple. In West Virginia, for
example, a family is eligible for AFDC if it "has insufficient income or
other resources to provide subsistence compatible with decency and health."
Many applicants, particularly unmarried mothers, have no income and
no assets and glide effortlessly onto the rolls. However, for borderline
cases, most states have complicated formulae for deciding eligibility and
benefit levels. The formulae cover how valuable a car or burial plot (!)
the applicant may own, whether the income of step-parents counts against
eligibility, whether food stamps are counted as income, etc. Washington
state even specifies that $33 a month can be set aside for guide-dog food.
The payment levels that result from these meditations have a vague relation
to the local cost of living. The average monthly payment per family for
the entire country is $388, but is as low as $119 in Alabama and $122 in
Mississippi, and as high as $688 in Alaska, $624 in California, and $565
How many Americans are on the dole? In 1991, the average monthly AFDC
case load was 4,628,000 families, or 13,712,000 individuals. That was 5.5
percent of the population and the average family size was 2.96. The period
from 1988 to 1991 saw the biggest increase in recipients in the history
of AFDC – the rolls grew by nearly two million.
Total spending on AFDC in 1991 was $20.3 billion in direct handouts
and $2.5 billion in administration costs. Every year, about 90 million
Americans pay federal income taxes, so this means that every six or seven
taxpayers support a welfare recipient as well as themselves and their families.
If welfare payments were set by the federal government they would be
linked to inflation, but most of the states have let the real value of
welfare decline. In fact, the inflation-adjusted value of the average AFDC
payment is only 57 percent of what it was in 1970. However, virtually all
welfare recipients also get food stamps, and the federal government has
tied their value to inflation. Thus, the average combined benefit of welfare
and food stamps is still 73 percent of what it was in 1970.
Race of Recipients
Blacks are vastly overrepresented on the rolls. As the first chart on
this page shows, 5.4 million – nearly 40 percent – of all recipients are
black. The second chart compares actual numbers of recipients with numbers
in the population to show the percentage of each racial group that lives
on welfare. Only 2.9 percent of whites are on welfare whereas 18 percent
of blacks are. This means that any given black is six times as likely as
any given white to be on the dole. Although Asians have the lowest percentage
on the dole after whites, they are still nearly twice as likely as whites
to be recipients.
Given these disparities by race, it is no surprise to find that the
states with the most non-whites generally have the most welfare. In the
District of Columbia, which is 75 percent non-white, 9.3 percent of the
population are on welfare. In 35 percent – black Mississippi, 6.8 percent
are on welfare. In some notorious black ghettos, more people are on welfare
than not. In Camden (NJ), two-thirds of the adults are on welfare and in
East St. Louis (IL) 75 percent of the population gets AFDC.
In such overwhelmingly white states as New Hampshire, North Dakota,
and Idaho, about two percent of the population is on welfare. Region and
eligibility standards make a big difference, though. Although West Virginia
is 96 percent white, 6.3 percent of its people are on the dole.
The welfare rolls look very different from state to state. In the District
of Columbia, 98 percent of recipients are black (and 82 percent have never
been married). In Hawaii, which is 62 percent Asian, 70 percent of recipients
are Asian. In California, 33 percent of recipients are white, 23 percent
are black, 29 percent are Hispanic, and 12 percent are Asian.
How long do people stay, as the British would say, "on the suck"? Thirty
percent of recipients are on for less than two years and 50 percent for
less than four years. However, at any given time, 65 percent of all recipients
have been getting welfare for more than eight years.
These numbers sound contradictory, but they are not. Welfare is like
a hospital in which most of the beds are filled with chronic cases. A large
number of short-term patients can still be admitted one after another in
the rest of the beds. In this way, at any given time, most patients are
chronic, but of all the patients treated during the year, the majority
may have been admitted for only a short time.
Just as blacks are more likely than whites to be on the rolls in the
first place, they stay on longer. The average stay for a white is 5.95
years while for a black it is 8.14 years. Twenty percent of white recipients
are on for 10 years or more, while 32 percent of blacks are on for that
Welfare combines with the tax system to give poor people perverse incentives.
If a welfare recipient works, her AFDC payments and food stamp allotments
are cut back. The effect in each state is different, but as a national
average, a welfare mother keeps only 41 cents on the dollar from the first
$5,000 she makes and only 52 cents on the dollar of the next $5,000. For
her third $5,000, which would raise her annual earned income from $10,000
to $15,000, she pays income taxes as well, so is left with only 39 cents
out of every dollar earned. This is the equivalent of a tax rate of 61
percent, and does not even take into consideration the loss of Medicaid,
which can have a cash value greater than the value of AFDC payments.
Tax laws and welfare also combine to penalize welfare mothers who marry.
In New York State, a woman on AFDC with two chlidren has the equivalent
of an after-tax income of $14,000 a year. If she marries a man who makes
$20,000 a year, she loses her benefits, and the man's tax deductions for
having acquired three dependents are worth only about $1,400. Thus, after
marriage, the couple has 42 percent less disposable income than they did
together as single people.
Work and marriage are bulwarks against poverty. Welfare discourages
Welfare, the different rates at which the races use it, and illegitimacy
are all closely related to child poverty. Children of all races are more
likely to be poor if they do not have fathers, and Hispanic children are
more likely to be poor than black children. In female-headed households,
68.4 percent of Hispanic children are poor, while 64.7 percent of black
children and 45.9 percent of white children are poor. In families in which
a man is present, 26.7 percent of Hispanic children are poor, while 19.3
percent of black children and 9.5 percent of white children are poor.
Interestingly, a child's chances of being poor are linked to how many brothers
and sisters he has. The child poverty rate in one-child families is 12.4
percent, rises to 23.7 percent if there are three children, and reaches
50.6 percent if there are five or more.
An astonishing 68
percent of black babies are illegitimate.
The overall child poverty rate for the United States is 19.9 percent.
This rate is rising as more and more children live with a single parent.
From 1970 to 1990, the proportion of children living with just one parent
doubled from one in eight to one in four. Having two parents through age
ten is about the best insurance policy against poverty that a child can
have. Eighty percent of such children can expect not to spend a single
day in poverty. A child who spends his first ten years with only one parent
has a better than 90 percent chance of being poor at least part of that
Marriage makes a huge difference even for the children of teen-aged
mothers. About half of all unmarried adolescent mothers go on welfare for
at least part of the year after the birth of their child, compared to only
seven percent of those who were married when they gave birth. (It is worth
noting that half of all teen-aged mothers manage not to go on welfare during
the first year after their children are born. The racial breakdown for
such mothers is not available.)
The family prospects for black and white children are vastly different.
Although 80 percent of white children live with both parents only 38 percent
of black children do. Fewer than six percent of black children can expect
to live with both parents until age eighteen.
Soaring illegitimacy rates are closely linked to single parenthood
and child poverty. In 1940, only 3.8 percent of all births were illegitimate,
and this was before reliable contraception and legal abortion. Today 28
percent of American babies are illegitimate, and here too the races show
great disparities. An astonishing 68 percent of black babies are illegitimate
while the figures are 37 percent for Hispanics and 20 percent for whites.
Heedless child-bearing is one of the defining characteristics of the underclass
and it appears to be increasingly characteristic of blacks of all classes.
Illegitimacy is not merely a good indicator of a child's chances of
being poor or going on welfare. It is also one of the best signs of whether
a child will die in the first year of life, drop out of school, be a criminal,
have his own illegitimate children, or go on welfare.
Do bastardy and fatherlessness cause these things? To some degree they
unquestionably do. A loving husband and wife together are vastly better
equipped to rear children than is a single woman. On the other hand, people
who have illegitimate children tend to be a shiftless lot who would give
their children poor upbringings even if they were married.
At the same time, there can be little doubt that welfare, along with
Food Stamps and Medicaid (see following story), have greatly eased the
pain that used to discourage Americans from having babies they could not
support. Removing the penalties for reckless procreation only makes it
all the more likely or, as the British philosopher Herbert Spencer used
to say, "the ultimate effect of shielding men from the effects of folly
is to fill the world with fools."
A Loosening of Laws
Although illegitimacy is now central to welfare, the original 1935 federal
legislation that established the program did not offer benefits at all
to unwed mothers. It specified that assistance was to be for "widowed,
separated, or divorced mothers" in cases when "relatives, liable under
the law for ... support, are not able to provide adequate care ...." Unmarried
mothers were not thought to be fit beneficiaries and married mothers were
eligible only after the resources of relatives had been exhausted.
ADC (Aid to Dependent Children), as it was then called, was the first
federal welfare program, but some states had already established "mothers'
aid laws." Like ADC, they did not countenance illegitimacy. A 1921 nation-wide
survey of recipients of "mothers' aid" found that of the 60,119 beneficiaries,
83.3 percent were widows, 6 percent had been deserted by their husbands,
8 percent had disabled husbands, 2.3 percent were divorced, and that only
0.09 percent (55 recipients out of 60,119) were unwed mothers. The 83.3
percent who were widows is a reproachful contrast to today's figure of
just 1.5 percent.
Eligibility requirements for welfare were loosened slowly during the
1940s and 1950s and quickly in the 1960s. When illegitimacy rates began
to soar, fathers and husbands became irrelevant to AFDC. It is now fashionable
to bemoan the breakup of the American family, but in many of today's "families,"
Uncle Sam is the man of the house. The more readily government steps in
as father and husband, the rarer the real thing becomes.
• • • BACK
TO TOP • • •
The Big Payoff
Welfare is just one car
in the government gravy
by Marian Evans
Costly though it is, AFDC is not America's most expensive handout program
for the poor. Medicaid is vastly more expensive and is growing much more
rapidly. Costs have gone from $1.6 billion (in nominal dollars) in 1966
to $127 billion in 1992. In the last two years, Medicaid costs have risen
more than 30 percent each year!
AFDC recipients are automatically eligible for Medicaid. Besides them,
there are another 12 million Medicaid recipients – mostly old people –
whose medical expenses are paid for by the taxpayer. This makes for a grand
total of 25 million Medicaid recipients, or just over ten percent of the
population. There are only 3.6 federal taxpayers for every Medicaid recipient.
Although more than half of the people who get Medicaid are on AFDC,
they consume only about 27 percent of the $127 billion. This is because
young poor people are less expensive to treat than old poor people. Even
so, in 1992, welfare recipients cost the taxpayer $34.5 billion in Medicaid
payments, or half again as much as the cost of the entire AFDC program.
As it does with AFDC, the federal government pays half the administration
cost of Medicaid, and depending on how poor a state is, from 50 percent
to 80 percent of the cost of benefits.
The other big program for poor people is food stamps. Nine percent of
the population, or 22.6 million people were getting them in 1991, at a
total cost to the taxpayer of $21 billion. This program is paid for by
the U.S. Department of Agriculture and is run
by some of its 122,594 employees, though the states share administration
Benefits are supposed to be based on what the Department calls its Thrifty
Food Plan, which is what the bureaucrats think grateful, nutrition-conscious
poor people will be using their stamps for. A family of three gets a maximum
of $292 a month for Thrifty Food.
Stores are forbidden to accept food stamps as payment for alcohol, tobacco,
or hot food for immediate consumption. Food stamps can, however, be spent
on seeds and plants that are to be cultivated for food. In parts of Alaska,
they can be used for things like fish hooks, knives, and fishing poles
that are supposed to be used for catching food.
Eligibility requirements are set by the federal government, and they
may not be the same as state requirements for welfare. However,
eligibility standards for food stamps are looser – there are nearly 10
million more people on food stamps than on AFDC – and the vast majority
of people on welfare also get food stamps.
Ever since our legislators started taking money away from people who
have it, they have never rested from their task of thinking of new ways
to give it to people who don't. Some of their brain children are Pell grants,
Federal Housing Assistance ($20.4 billion a year), WIC (Women, Infants
and Children) food ($2.1 billion), Trade Adjustment Assistance ($136 million),
Supplemental Security Income ($21 billion), Title XX Social Services Block
Grants ($2.8 billion), Title IV Child Welfare Services ($3.5 billion),
National School Lunch Program ($4 billion), National School Breakfast Program
($677 million), Job Training Partnership ($1.8 billion), Summer Youth Employment
Program ($704 million), Job Corps (yes, it is still around, $862 million),
Head Start ($2.2 billion), and Low-Income Home Energy Assistance ($1.5
None of these programs even pretends, as Social Security or Unemployment
Compensation do, to have been funded by the beneficiaries themselves. Like
welfare payments, they are outright handouts. If it ever occurred to you
to wonder what occupies the small minds of the 123,959 employees of the
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, it is just one thing: spending
your money. Other government schemes, like the Railroad Unemployment Compensation
System, the Black Lung Disability Trust Fund, and the Vaccine Injury Compensation
Trust Fund have the telltale stink of give-aways too, but it is hard to
find out just what they involve.
All this means that an enormous amount of money must be yanked out of
the pockets of those poor, long-suffering 90 million taxpayers so that
it can be splashed out to people the government has decided are more deserving
of it. Non-whites are disproportionately more deserving than whites. Only
33 percent of the children enrolled in Head Start, for example, are white.
However, when it comes to growing fat on government handouts, Puerto
Ricans take top honors. Although only 2.9 percent of white people are on
welfare, 23 percent of the population of Puerto Rico is on the dole. Although
ten percent of Americans are on Medicaid (a racial breakdown is not available),
36 percent of Puerto Ricans are on it. Finally, though nine percent of
the country gets food stamps, 42 percent of Puerto Ricans do. There are
so many food stamps floating around the island that they are practically
a second currency. Even prostitutes accept them.
Accepts food stamps.
White people are, indeed, a rum lot. Not only are they being displaced
by non-whites, their freely-elected government hastens the process by raising
their taxes so that yet more non-whites can have illegitimate children
who will eat free school lunches and live on food stamps. The end may not
yet be in sight, but it is not hard to imagine how it will look.
• • • BACK
TO TOP • • •
A new form of political
may be needed to
save Western Civilization.
reviewed by Thomas Jackson
It is widely recognized that America is in decline
but very few authors recognize the extent to which the loss of will among
whites is central to that decline. Massive non-white immigration, schools
that teach minority ethnic pride rather than facts, the refusal to recognize
racial differences, constant attacks on Western civilization, racial hiring
quotas – all are enormously damaging to our country and all continue only
because whites let them continue.
Howard Allen Enterprises, 1992, 233 pp.,
Wilmot Robertson once believed that these corrosive forces could be
brought under control and that the United States could regain the racial
and cultural coherence that made it great. No longer. In The Ethnostate,
he outlines a new form of statecraft that might emerge from the wreckage
of 21st-century America. He argues that huge, multi-racial conglomerates
are probably doomed, and that just as the Soviet empire has broken up along
ethnic lines, so could Canada and the United States. In Mr. Robertson's
view, small, streamlined, homogeneous "ethnostates" are not only the last
hope for keeping Western civilization alive in an increasingly non-white,
anti-white world, they are also the best proving grounds for evolutionary
Mr. Robertson, the goal of mankind should be not only the preservation
of cultural variety but continual evolutionary advance. As he points out,
there is a span of only 50,000 years between Neanderthal man and Isaac
Newton. If the sun continues to burn for millions of years, there is no
reason why our distant descendants should not be as different from us as
we are from apes. Evolution requires genetic diversity and true diversity
arises only in isolation. Therefore, any open-borders or one-world scheme
will eventually lead to cultural and genetic uniformity, which would be
both an esthetic and an evolutionary disaster.
If homogeneous ethnostates come into existence, their first duty would
be to guard their unique genetic heritages against dilution and to improve
upon them in every possible way. Such states would have the firmest possible
foundations because they would "rest on the hard rock of genes and culture
instead of the quicksands of proletarian myths, egalitarian fantasies and
15 Million People
The maximum size of Mr. Robertson's ethnostate would be perhaps the
size of Portugal, with a population no larger than about 15 million people.
Scores of ethnostates could be scattered not only across America and Europe
but around the globe. In the United States, where cities have become very
mixed, neighborhoods could have firm boundaries and as much local autonomy
Political entities on such a small scale could be exceedingly homogeneous,
and many strong arguments can be made for homogeneity. The most obvious
is that race, religion, language, and culture are the natural fault lines
along which peoples divide. Just as Japan benefits immeasurably because
its people are similar to each other, ethnostates everywhere would enjoy
a unity of purpose that is impossible in a pluralistic state.
Many of the advantages of the ethnostate are nothing more than the absence
of the terrible conflicts that weaken the United States. A mono-racial
society would have no need for the tremendous apparatus of race relations
officials who make up one of our few remaining growth industries. It would
not have to cope with the frustrations that result when differently endowed
groups face the daily consequences of those differences. Its citizens would
not have conflicting foreign loyalties that hamstring its foreign policy.
It would have an authentic history rather than the formless mush or ethnic
cheer leading that now pass for American history. It could honestly discuss
eugenics without raising racial animosity. It would not have a justice
system riven by racial loyalties or standards of physical beauty that inevitably
value one race over another.
As Mr. Robertson points out, ethnostates could also be seed beds for a
blossoming of culture. Elizabethan England, Renaissance Florence, and Wiemar
at the time of Geothe were exceedingly homogeneous, as were Japan and China
in their periods of greatest cultural creativity. When it need not please
every taste, art can be free and strong. Without morality art can degenerate
into pornography, but in a coherent society without competing religions
and moralities, the sense of duty or honor can likewise be strong.
Many of the advantages
of the ethnostate are nothing more than the absence of the terrible conflicts
that weaken the United States.
Mr. Robertson points out that Government and the laws could be minimal
in an ethnostate. People of the same stock and of similar expectations
turn to custom and good manners to regulate their affairs. It is only in
a society of competing customs and decaying manners that laws must intrude
into every corner of life. A piling up of laws is a kind of moral prosthesis,
and a sure sign that a society has lost its moral center.
For racial minorities as well, there would be great advantages in having
their own ethnostates. They would no longer have to live by the standards
of others, and could concentrate on their own progress rather than blame
their failures on "racism." Although some clear-thinking non-whites might
realistically fear that their groups were incapable of maintaining civilized
societies, others would prefer to be masters in their own homes rather
than servants in the mansions of others.
All of these advantages of homogeneity are easily understood by anyone
who has observed the United States. Mr. Robertson's economic prescriptions
for the ethnostate are more unfamiliar. It is true that just as different
peoples build different cultures, they would build different economies.
No model of central planning or free enterprise should be universal. However,
Mr. Robertson suggests that for ethnostates to preserve their uniqueness,
they should have as little foreign trade as possible. Striving for self
sufficiency makes a people well rounded.
However, if the world were to split up into ethnostates no larger than
Holland, autarky would impoverish them. As Mr. Robertson points out, cultural
coherence and genetic diversity are more important than material wealth,
but Holland's domestic market would not support an automobile industry
or even a basic electronics industry. Without foreign trade, most ethnostates
would be very poor.
The Road to Dispossession
For the time being, however, what are the forces that keep whites in
the United States and, to a lesser degree, those in Western Europe on the
road to dispossession? One of the most obvious is widespread refusal to
recognize that the races of man are not equivalent. Different races make
cultures in their own images as much as they are made by their cultures.
As long as whites are browbeaten into believing that race does not matter,
they will continue to cooperate in their own marginalization.
Another potent factor is the widespread belief that homogeneous states
would inevitably make war on each other. It is commonly thought that internal
frictions are preferable to the immensely greater frictions of war and
that the more nations resemble each other the less likely they are to fight.
Mr. Robertson counters this view by saying that if any ethnically pure
state made war on another it would be tantamount to genocide and that genocide
is so terrible a crime no national leader would dare be
charged with it.
Mr. Robertson's more convincing argument is the one that justified the
independent French nuclear force: A small nation can deter aggression from
much more powerful nations as long as it can destroy the aggressor's major
cities with a few nuclear missiles. Whatever the merits of either of these
arguments, if ethnostates were all that stood between whites and extinction
of their culture, any but the most demoralized whites would choose the
ethnostate even if it did increase the chances of war.
Another force that
is pushing whites aside is their own altruism. No other race welcomes impoverished,
diseased aliens into its midst or sends its soldiers around the world to
feed people who cannot feed themselves. In Mr. Robertson's view, this is
partly the result of the excesses of Christianity, a religion, he says,
which "can easily become an altruistic Trojan Horse." Although altruism
is a noble thing, he argues that it should remain within the ethnostate:
"It should not be extended to fishing the muddy waters of other people's
Another reason why the dismemberment of the United States seems farfetched
is that political doctrine always lags behind reality. As Mr. Roberston
points out, the Constitution and Bill or Rights were written by Englishmen
for Englishmen in a sparsely populated nation of farmers. It was the product
not only of its times but of the race and culture of its authors. How can
we pretend that such a document still applies to a disorderly urban mix
like New York City? Doctrine eventually catches up with reality, but if
it lags too far, the adjustment may be violent, as the French kings, the
Russian Czar, and the Shah of Iran all discovered. Mr. Robertson calls
the veneration of dead ideas a kind of ideological necrophilia.
Though it is not yet the ally of Western civilization, the environmental
movement soon could be. Anyone who is passionately concerned about the
Snail Darter or the Spotted Owl should surely be concerned about the survival
of the different races of his own kind. Eventually, it should dawn on environmentalists
how disproportionate it is to do battle in the name of the human habitat
but to say nothing about who will live in it. The Ethnostate is
in many ways an extension of "green" thinking in that it proposes to allot
to the different tribes of men an environment appropriate to each, so that
each may prosper and none may interfere with his neighbors.
Although events in the former Soviet Union should be a lesson to us
all, Mr. Robertson has no illusions that Europe or North America will divide
neatly into ethnostates. He does not rule out the possibility that when
non-whites become majorities in the United States they could do what the
black Haitians did after their rebellion against the French: hunt down
and exterminate all the whites who were left alive. The Ethnostate
is remarkable and thought provoking, but it is an essay on what would be
desirable, not necessarily what is probable.
It may be that whites do not have the will to save themselves. It may
be that both in America and in Europe, they will let a flood of aliens
push them aside and let their homelands be transformed into northern colonies
of the third world. For Mr. Robertson, what may happen is less important
than what we believe in and what we fight for. This is the frame of mind
he proposes for whites who see the dangers that lie ahead: "I'm right,
so I will go ahead, come what may. If no one listens, so what? . . . Yes,
my ship of state, my West, may be going down, but if she goes, I'm going
to make sure that at least one member of the crew is still hoisting sail
as she sinks."
The Ethnostate is available from Howard Allen Enterprises, Box 76,
Cape Canaveral, FL 32920. The price is $12.00 plus $1.50 for postage and
• • • BACK
TO TOP • • •
O Tempora, O Mores!
The Language of Learning
One out of every eight students in New York City public schools either
gets bilingual instruction or is taught English as a foreign language.
Ever since 1974, when orders went out to teach all subjects – including
math and physics – in foreign students' native tongues, New York has been
desperate for "bilingual" teachers. Since these teachers are hired under
special order, they need not meet the same qualifications as other teachers,
and are hired under a program that is not subject to ordinary budgetary
Among the different ethnic groups there are sharply different levels
of enthusiasm for instruction in languages other than English. Hispanic
and Haitian parents, for example, show little interest in integrating into
American society and are pleased that their children are taught in Spanish
or Haitian Creole. Those most adamantly opposed to "bilingual" education
are Russians and Chinese, who insist on instruction in English. At Public
School 247 in the Bronx, Chinese and Russian parents were so unalterably
opposed to "bilingual" education for their children that the school's principal
finally disbanded classes that school regulations had required that he
establish.[ Joseph Berger, School Programs Assailed as Bilingual Bureaucracy,
NYT, 1/4/93, p. A1.]
One group of New York City school children fall into a sort of language
limbo. They are from the "English-speaking Caribbean," which includes such
places as Jamaica, St. Vincent, and Grenada. These children think they
speak English but they do not. There is no "bilingual" education for them,
and most do not take English as a foreign language. They go to ordinary
classes, where they stumble around with constructions like "I tell she,"
or "Him say this." The Caribbean is a little unclear on plurals, and children
are likely to talk about "two house" or "de house-dem."
Many Caribbean phrases are well-nigh unintelligible. Here are some sample
sentences in Jamaican creole with English translations:
Jien mada ben sik wan mont abak.
Jane's mother fell ill last month.
Di daangki hiez kech de haas anda him nuoz.
The ears of the donkey are larger than those of the horse.
Hag a mash up me yam grong.
Pigs are destroying my yam field.
Mi lib rait a di kraas ruod.
I live at the cross roads.
The school district is likely to solve this problem in its usual
way. It is considering establishing a program to be called "American Language
for Speakers of Other Englishes."[ Deborah Sontag, Caribbean Pupils' English
Seems Barrier, not Bridge, NYT, 11/28/92, p. A1.]
De Gustibus . . .
When West African slaves came to America they brought with them their
habit of eating dirt. In the southern United States, dirt eating is still
surprisingly common. A survey taken in 1971 in Holmes County (MS) found
that one in four adult women sometimes ate dirt, and the practice is known
throughout the South. For unknown reasons, in the United States it is only
black women who seem to eat dirt, though in West Africa both men and women
buy the dirt pellets on sale in markets.
In Mississippi, dirt for eating must be a particular kind – what is
technically known as red – yellow podsolic soil. It is a crunchy, clay
soil found in many parts of the South. Gourmet soil is found about two
miles south of Lexington (MS) on Highway 17. A hill side has been scooped
out by dirt-eaters, some of whom send shoe boxfuls to relatives who cannot
find the right soil "up North."
In Georgia, the fashion seems to be for a kind of white clay known as
kaolin. Attractive packages of it are on sale in Atlanta grocery stores.
One supplier to the trade is Georgia Down Home White Dirt Inc. of Griffin
(GA). An Atlanta man who sells kaolin for 25 cents a bag reports that most
of his customers are pregnant women.[ David Beasley, Trying to stop a dirty
habit, Atlanta Journal, Jan. 9, 1993, p. B2.]
At one time it was thought that African women felt a craving for dirt
during pregnancy, when their bodies require certain minerals. Studies have
since shown that women who eat dirt show no differences in nutritional
balance from those who do not. Also, dirt-eaters often crave dirt when
they are not pregnant. Dr. Dennis Frate is the director of the University
of Mississippi's Rural Health Research Program and is an authority on dirt-eating.
"It's analogous to eating potato chips," says Dr. Frate; "A snack food
is what it is."[ AP, "Dirt-Eating Custom Fading Out in the South," Grand
Rapids Press, Nov. 24, 1993, p. D1.]
All the News That's Fit to Slant
The March issue of Esquire has published a long article about the New
York Times that includes some things we already knew. "The Times is
basically guided by the principles of political correctness," says a senior
reporter; "It's terrified to offend any of the 'victimized' groups."
Executive Editor Max Frankel has encouraged writers to work "a subtle
point of view" into what are supposed to be news stories. Or, as another
reporter says, "You'd be given an assignment to do a piece on a conservative
personality and [the desk] would tell you, up front, 'Don't make it too
nice.' " The only surprise is that anyone at the Times ever had
to be explicit about it.
The article also describes how the "principles of political correctness"
have not saved the newspaper from the agonies that come from trying to
"celebrate diversity." The harder the paper tries to recruit non-whites
and the more it does for them the more dissatisfied they get.[ Robert Anson,
The best of Times, the Worst of times, Esquire, March 1993, pp. 103ff.]
Voting With Their Wallets
Congressional districts, which have been redrawn in accordance with
the 1990 census, must now be reshaped to create as many districts as possible
in which non-whites are the majority. As a consequence there are now 32
districts with black majorities and 20 with Hispanic majorities. This is
26 more non-white majority districts than ten years ago. One side effect
of the racial gerrymander has been to create the poorest congressional
districts in the country. In more than half of the districts in which blacks
or Hispanics are the majority more than 25 percent of the inhabitants are
poor. The poorest district of all is New York's 16th district where, by
federal standards, 42 percent of the inhabitants live below the poverty
line.[ Poverty upshot of some redistricting, Clarion-Ledger, march 24,
1993, p. 4A.]
In many city school districts, whites are a slim and dwindling minority.
In Richmond (VA) only ten percent of the students are white, and one of
the concessions that some principals had quietly made to them was to keep
them together in the same classes rather than scatter them throughout the
school. This process, known as "clustering," has only recently come to
light and has been
trumpeted as a despicable vestige of segregation. The NAACP and other black
groups have ordered the school board to stop this racist practice, and
the board has complied.
There seems to be no objection when public schools across the country
institute Afro-centric curricula or even when entire schools are set up
to teach black pride, as has been done in Detroit. Nevertheless, the idea
that white children might be better off in classes with other whites unleashes
roars of disapproval. One black principal of an elementary school explained
that she "clustered" whites because she thought it "met the social and
emotional needs of the white children."[ Erich Harrison, Richmond Will
Stop 'Clustering' White Students," Los Angeles Times, Feb. 25, 1993, p.
A1.] She should have known better than to worry about the needs of white
To the Last Man
Ever since 1905, when they saved it from the wrecker's ball, the Daughters
of the Republic of Texas have maintained the Alamo and run it as a museum.
This is a boon to the state of Texas, which is so short on money that it
has proposed closing down 11 parks and historic sites that it cannot afford
Ron Wilson, a black state legislator from Houston has proposed a bill
that would take the Alamo away from the Daughters of the Republic of Texas
and give it to the state to operate. Why would anyone want to do this?
"They [the Daughters] have chosen not to highlight a number of Hispanics
who helped defend the Alamo," explains Representative Wilson. "They also
have not given the correct historical perspective of the Mexican government,"
he adds; "They were opposed to slavery while the Texans endorsed it."[
Alamo II, Houston Chronicle, march 3, 1993; "That's Foolish, Ron," Houston
The union that represents the employees of New York City's Human Resources
Administration has filed a suit against the city claiming that whites have
suffered discrimination in promotions. Civil service rules clearly state
that the most qualified people must be promoted, but blacks and Hispanics
have been moved up over the heads of dozens of more qualified whites. Though
she now denies it, the agency's Commissioner, a black woman named Barbara
Sabol, once complained that the people on the list of employees most qualified
for promotion were "too white and too male." Her underlings reportedly
corrected the problem.[ James Bennet, "Union Plans Bias Lawsuit Over Agency
Promotions," NYT, 3/15/93, p. B3.]
Detroit, which is 74 percent black, is now the poorest big city in the
United States. One third of its residents live below the federal poverty
line, whereas as one fifth did in 1979. The next poorest cities are New
Orleans (62 percent black and 32 percent poor), Cleveland (48 percent black
and 29 percent poor), and El Paso (3 percent black, 69 percent Hispanic,
and 25 percent poor).[ James Tobin, Detroit poorest big city in US, Detroit
News, Feb. 9, 1993, p. 1A.]
Despite its poverty, Detroit finds it must spend its dwindling dollars
in unfortunate ways. Students in Detroit schools are killing and maiming
each other so frequently that the city has started phasing in a program
on violence prevention. This includes "peer mentors, crisis counselling
and student teams to mediate disputes." The program will eventually be
extended to all of Detroit's schools from kindergarten on up, and will
cost at least $1 million a year.[ Ron Russell, "Schools Draft Plan to fight
violence," Detroit News, Feb. 11, 1993, p. B1.]
The city certainly needs something. After 18-year-old Karlos Rhodes
shot and killed 16-year-old Darnell Byrd and stole his leather jacket,
the killer blamed the victim for the trouble. "He didn't do what he was
supposed to do," explained Mr. Rhodes, saying that Mr. Byrd had turned
to run rather than give up the coat.[ Ann Sweeney, "Victim's to blame for
his death alleged gunman says," Detroit News, Feb. 11, 1993.]
Hey, Big Spender
A few Californians are beginning to discover that illegal aliens are
an expensive habit. Governor Pete Wilson has once more braved public obloquy
by pointing out that 11 percent of the state's prison inmates are illegals
(at a cost of $250 million a year to house them), that 300,000 illegals
get state health care benefits ($900 million a year), and that in Los Angeles
County alone, 250,000 children of illegals go to public schools ($1.2 billion
The state as a whole spends $3.6 billion a year on students who are either
illegals or who are U.S.-born children of illegals. If Gov. Wilson thinks
the border should be better patrolled he is soft-pedaling the idea. He
thinks the federal government should reimburse the state for the money
it spends on illegals.[ 31.3 million call California home, Santa Barbara
New Press, Feb. 16, 1993.] He has, however, announced that if the state
legislature would pass a law forbidding public education for illegals he
would sign it.[ No state school funds for illegals? Orange County Register,
Feb. 6, 1993, p. A3.]
San Diego County has recently been counting up how much money it splashes
out on illegals. Over the past 11 years it has spent about two thirds of
its budget for indigent health care on illegal aliens and citizens of foreign
countries. Over the years, that has added up to $43.3 million. In the first
six months of 1992, 36 percent of the poor people who got free medical
care were illegal aliens, and 24 percent were citizens of foreign countries.
County officials are also asking the feds to help pay.[ Rex Dalton, "Most
health funds go to migrants," San Diego Union Tribune,
Feb. 6, 1993.]
All this is helpful. When Congressmen from Idaho and West Virginia are
presented with the bill for services for illegals, they may begin to wonder
how those illegals might be prevented from coming here in the first place.
Can't Win Either Way
At a recent conference on AIDS in Johannesburg, Nelson Mandela said
that apartheid helped spread the disease among South African blacks. Forgetting,
apparently, that South African blacks have the highest standard of living
of all blacks in Africa, he said that whites were responsible for unemployment,
disintegrating family life, insufficient health services, and the lack
of recreation facilities. He also said that the white government's campaign
to get people to wear condoms as a precaution against AIDS was "viewed
with suspicion as a ploy to control the population."[ "Mandela on AIDS
Populi, Nov. 1992.]
Portrait of the Artist
Maya Angelou, the black woman who recited a poem at Bill Clinton's inauguration,
is perhaps not the ideal role model. In 1982, she was appointed "Professor
for Life" at Wake Forest University in North Carolina and she receives
a salary of more than $100,000 a year. However, she does not teach. Although
her photograph graces many university publications, no one knows when she
is likely to offer a course. She has no office, and her telephone number
is connected to an answering machine. No one
returns calls. She has given a few courses in the past, and says that she
likes to teach "whatever comes to mind." Although she is supposed to teach
"American Studies," Wake Forest has no department or courses of that name.
Miss Angelou describes herself as a former madam, prostitute, burlesque
stripper, and advisor to Malcolm X. She likes to talk about how she traveled
to Ghana to "teach African dance and music" to the Africans. During Mr.
Clinton's inauguration, Wake Forest's president had a big-screen television
set up in the student center so that all could see her participation in
the ceremony. One student observed that this was one of the few times Miss
Angelou had even been seen at Wake Forest.[ John Meroney, "Angelou a symnbol
of Clinton's apathy," Detroit News, Feb. 20,
1993, p. 6C.]
Rappin' With the Home Boys
The word "nigger" divides blacks. Older, middle-class blacks hate the
sound of the word, but younger, ghetto blacks use it not only for blacks
in general, but also as a term of endearment, humor, or solidarity. Ghetto
blacks see the word as a sign of their complete alienation from white society,
and calling each other "nigger" gives them a sense of camaraderie. According
to some blacks, the word should be "nigga" rather than "nigger." Some even
claim that this stands for Never Ignorant Getting Goals Accomplished.
All blacks agree, however, that no matter how much blacks may use the
word it is off limits to whites. A Los Angeles rap "singer" who is tired
of being asked about the word says this:
"People need to stop f***ing with little words . . . . Bottom line:
If I'm making a million dollars, I'm a million-dollar nigger to black people.
To everybody else, I'm a black man. Now, let's move on."[ Darrell Dawsey,
"A Word of Caution," Detroit News, Jan. 22, 1993, p. 1C.]
After 67 years of being called the Scholastic Aptitude Test, the SAT
has changed its name to Scholastic Assessment Test. Too many people complained
that the old name sounded as though the test measured something inherent,
and this the test's administrators could not bear.[ SAT gets new name,
Atlanta Constitution, march 27, 1993, p. A12.]
There are at least 50 Hispanic-Americans with net worths of more than
$20 million. Four are worth more than $100 million. At the top of the heap
is Joseph A. Unanue who, together with his family, is worth $330 million.
He made his money from Goya Foods of Seacaucus (NJ), which supplies the
[ Hispanic Business, march, 1993, p. 40.]
Gifts for All
Schools in Jacksonville (FL), like schools everywhere, do not have enough
blacks in classes for gifted children. The problem, it appears, is that
in order to be admitted to such classes, a child must have an IQ of 130
or higher, which would put him in the top three percent. A state task force
has been set up to figure out how to get more blacks into gifted programs
and has hit on the obvious solution: dispense with the IQ test. If the
task force has its way, black who score in the top 20 percent on tests
of math and reading will be considered "gifted" and will join whites in
special classes.[ Joan Hennessy, "School Board's Plan makes more minorities
gifted," Florida Times-Union, Feb. 16,
1993, p. A1.]
• • • BACK
TO TOP • • •
E T T E R S F R O M R E A D E
Sir – I have done some catch-up reading of American Renaissance
on my recent return to Europe and have found some outstanding articles.
How disconcerting to read in the February issue of the fate of California,
where I spent some 60 years of my life. I lived scarcely a mile from Monterey
Park where, I learn, fewer than one half of the current residents were
born in the United States.
And what about Europe; more particularly Germany? Here the view seems
to be widely held that what the U.S. does must be good. Partly as a result,
in pour hundreds of thousands of asylum seekers every year-most masquerading.
Liberals act pretty much the same everywhere, don't they?
Noel Merrihew, Wacken, Germany
Sir – Your article on how whites are leaving southern California and
moving to the whiter north reminded me of my parents. They moved to the
Gold Country, saying of their former suburb, "the parts that don't look
like a ghetto in Saigon look like a ghetto in Tijuana." Now, less than
five years later, they have virtually forgotten the unpleasantness they
left behind. They can't remember the things they used to say, and ask me,
"How did you become such a racist?"
Evelyn Hill, Santa Clara, Cal.
Sir – One of your readers, writing in the April issue, wonders what
can be done to keep California from becoming an outpost of the third world.
Crude violence and overt intimidation work against us, but there are
things we can do.
We can promote our own culture and boycott manifestations of alien culture.
We can attend our own music concerts and pointedly ignore Cinco de Mayo
celebrations. Politically, we can work to reduce state give-away programs
that attract immigrants. Mainstream conservatism, weak as it is, can serve
our cause in this instance. Measures making English the official language
will put additional barriers in the way of at least some minorities. Personally,
we can socialize with our own kind and support each other in the marketplace.
California is a wonderful place, and I am not willing to give it up
to third worlders. There is still a lot we can do. We can't run forever.
We must fight.
Lars Peterson, Nevada City, Cal.
Sir – Located in the heart of Los Angeles, is a 56 square-mile area
with a population of more than one million. Sixty-three percent of the
adults are not U.S. citizens. A larger percentage of the children are citizens,
since they were born in America.
Between 1980 and 1990, the number of foreign-born residents in this
area – which one might call Nuevo Los Angeles – grew by nearly 51 percent.
The number of people who don't speak English increased by 45 percent. Most
are native Spanish speakers, although about 25,000 speak neither English
Tuberculosis rates are 75 percent higher than in the rest of Los Angeles
County and 216 percent higher than the national average. Sixty-two percent
of the new cases occurred in people not born in the U.S. Of those 62 percent,
about half of the cases involve people who have been in America for two
years or less.
The police report that in Nuevo Los Angeles the homicide rate is nearly
77 percent higher than in the rest of the city. Property crime rates are
lower because there is so little to steal. Nuevo Los Angeles is demanding
the right to vote, using the argument "no taxation without representation."
Bette Hammond, S.T.O.P.I.T, Box 5026, Novato, CA 94948
Sir – A few weeks ago, the national media were full of accounts of a
"Nigger Night" held by an all-white fraternity at a New Jersey college.
Pledges were made to paint Xs on their foreheads, wear silly clothing,
and imitate the behavior attributed to lower class blacks. The same networks
and newspapers that found this story so fascinating had nothing to say
about the fate of Missy McLauchlin (AR of April).
You say that "AR does not usually report on routine anti-white
crime." I thank you for deviating from your standard practice. Fairy tales
about spacemen and poltergeists are more common fare in our mass media
than are accurate reports about urban atrocities. I commend you for defying
the virtual gag order that has been put on the discussion of black-on-white
James Macri, Boston, Mass.
Sir – In his February letter, Bailey Norfleet writes that since the
world is already overpopulated, whites should restrict their families even
if others do not. In my opinion, chldren are our only real wealth. My wife
and I have a big family – our next child will be our eighth. Yes, it means
sacrifices and hard work, especially since we also home school. But have
you ever had anything valuable that was not worth working for? So many
whites say they cannot afford to have more than two children – or any children
at all. I would like to ask them how much enjoyment, satisfaction, and
protection they are really likely to get from a new stereo, television,
Robert Lee Taylor, Fisher, Tex.
• • • BACK
TO TOP • • •