23 Years of Black Rule
view from neighboring South Africa.
it was ruled by whites and known as Rhodesiawas the most
prosperous nation in southern Africa. When black rule began in
1980, the country had excellent railroads, good highways, and
clean, well run towns. It was rich in gold, chromium, platinum,
and coal, and Rhodesia was such an agricultural success it exported
food. It has now been reduced to a shattered ruin, facing famine,
with whites and black dissenters murdered and tortured.
Thabo Mbeki (left)
and Robert Mugabe
bad news for the whites of Southern Africa.
It is fashionable to blame the countrys
failures on the man who has been president since 1980, Robert
Mugabe. Even the famous white South African liberal Dorris Lessing
writes of his arbitrary cruelties, and tells us crimes
have been committed in the name of political correctness.
Mr. Mugabe is undoubtedly a bad character, but so are most of
the people who rule African countries. It is possible he hastened
Zimbabwes decline but decline was inevitable once blacks
took over institutions built by whites.
In the eyes of the world, black
rule is so fine a thing it must never be spoiled by describing
it accurately. The press therefore ignored the thievery and anti-white
hatred of Zimbabwes new government. It looked the other
way when Mr. Mugabes North Korean-trained Fifth Brigade
killed thousands of Ndebele tribesmen for failing to support their
new president from the Shona tribe. When, as early as the mid-1980s,
the United Nations reported that the Mugabe government was as
greedy and corrupt as any in Africa, there was silence in the
West. Mr. Mugabes latest anticsdriving white farmers
off the land, and killing and muzzling political opponentshave
finally forced a reluctant world to recognize him for the brute
that he is.
There seem to be two additional
motives beyond his usual avarice and cruelty behind Mr. Mugabes
current campaigns. Since his government had pillaged every other
source of wealth, including the mining sector, the 4,000 or so
white farmers who continued to be the backbone of the economy
were the only source of prosperity still available for redistribution,
that is to say, appropriation by Mr. Mugabes friends. At
the same time, Mr. Mugabe appears to have been deeply envious
of the worlds adulation of Nelson Mandela next door in South
Africa. By making one final and dramatic anti-colonial
gesture, and by consolidating power beyond the slightest threat,
he seemed to think his fame would reduce Mr. Mandela to insignificance.
Whatever the motives, in early 2000,
Zimbabwe launched a program of violence and ethnic cleansing against
whites, and began systematic terror against black Zimbabweans
who dared to oppose the government.
The campaign against whites has
been simple but effective. Truckloads of self-styled war
veteransthe vast majority of whom are far too young
to have fought the white regime in the bush war that ended 22
years agoshow up at white farms, where they camp out, get
drunk, threaten the farmer and his family, and beat up black workers.
The official fiction is that this is a spontaneous movement of
Zimbabwean peasants who have lost patience with the refusal of
whites to give up land they stole from blacks, but
the invading convoys are clearly supported and supplied by the
government. The police refuse to evict the war veterans,
and the government has ratified the occupations by issuing decrees
to revoke white ownership.
Most farmers have managed to get
out alive, but 11 have not. The first two to die were David Stevens
and Martin Olds. Their murders, which took place in 2000, set
the tone for the ethnic cleansing that has followed.
In the eyes of
the world, black rule is so fine a thing it must never
be spoiled by describing it accurately.
David Stevens, who shared profits
with his workers, was a member of the opposition party, Movement
for Democratic Change (MDC). On April 15, 2000, Mugabe-supporters
attacked him on his farm in the Macheke area, about 60 miles east
of Harare. He managed to escape to police protection, but the
mob of veterans stormed the police station and abducted
him in view of the several officers who did nothing. The blacks
dragged him into the bush, where they tortured him and shot him
at point-blank range with a shotgun. They then mixed his blood
with alcohol and drank it. Mr. Mugabe himself approved the murder,
saying Stevens had it coming to him because of his
work with the opposition.
Martin Olds, the second farmer to
die, was alone on his farm 400 miles southwest of Harare. He had
sent his wife and two children to relative safety with friends
because of death threats. He told the local police about the threats
but they did nothing. At dawn on April 18, 2000, hundreds of armed
men arrived at his farm in a convoy of 14 cars and a tractor trailer.
They attacked the farm house but the 42-year-old former soldier
held them off with a rifle and a shotgun. He telephoned his mother,
who called the police four times but they refused to intervene.
At one point a rifle bullet shattered his leg. He radioed to friends:
Ive been shot and I need an ambulance.
Farmers rushed to his assistance,
but were fired on when they approached his compound. They reported
that many of the blacks were drunk. Police, who had set up a road
block outside the farm, would not let an ambulance through. Mr.
Olds splinted his own leg and went on fighting, wounding several
attackers. The two-hour gun battle ended only when the blacks
set his house on fire and forced him out. They beat him to mush
and then shot him twice in the face at close range. The war
veterans then got into their vehicles and drove away.
His widow, Kathy Olds, fled to England
with their two children, a suitcase, and £60 in cash. His mother
should have done the same. Nearly a year later, 68-year-old Gloria
Olds died in a hail of bullets early one morning as she opened
the gates to her house. Her attackers also shot her three dogs.
On December 12, 2000, a gang of
war veterans gunned down another farmer, Henry Elsworth.
He was a 70-year-old cripple, hobbling on his crutches when he
was killed in Kwekwe, 125 miles southwest of Harare. His son Ian,
who took five bullets in the leg and groin during the attack,
said his father had received many death threats in the months
before the murder, and had even left the country briefly in the
hope tensions would subside.
Terry Ford, the tenth white farmer
killed, had given up resistance and was actually leaving his property
after an attack by 20 war veterans. Other veterans
stopped his car, forced him out, stood him up against a tree,
and executed him. Many other whitesmen and womenhave
been beaten, threatened, and intimidated.
The self-styled leader of the farm
invaders, the late Chenjerai Hunzvi, was a prominent Mugabe supporter,
who personally lead militants onto more than 1,700 farms. He actually
did fight against the white regime, and liked to go by the name
of Hitler. He was a member of the Zimbabwe parliament,
and at one time was probably the second most powerful man in the
country. No one worked harder to drive whites off the land. In
May 2000, Hunzvi publicly urged his countrymen to seek out British
passport holderswhom he called ruthless, cunning
peopleand force them out of the country.
Hitler was only following
government policy. In April 2000, Mr. Mugabe told a television
audience that white farmers were enemies of the state.
In October, he elaborated on whites: These crooks, really,
we inherited as part of our population . . . . We cannot expect
them to have straightened up, to be honest people, and an honest
community, all told. . . . Yes, some of them are good people,
but they remain cheats. They remain dishonest. On August
18, 2001, Zimbabwes Vice President Joseph Msika explained
that whites are not human beings.
Anyone who tormented whites or helped
drive them out was therefore a great leader. In June 2001, shortly
after Hunzvi died of AIDS, the ruling party politburo, headed
by Mr. Mugabe, declared Hunzvi an official national hero. He is
buried in Zimbabwes Heros Acre. In his funeral tribute,
Mr. Mugabe said the dead mans leadership was particularly
inspiring in that it came at an historic time.
No doubt because he can hardly believe
the British would abandon their co-racialists to death and dispossession,
Mr. Mugabe is convinced Anthony Blairs government is constantly
plotting against him and is responsible for many problems. Mr.
Blair has, in fact, said a few mild things against Mr. Mugabe,
but has not lifted a finger to prevent outrages against whites,
almost all of whom are of British stock, and many of whom also
hold British citizenship.
There is no doubt Mr. Mugabe wants
to expel whites, but the vast majority of his victims have been
black. The non-partisan Zimbabwe Human Rights Forum has drawn
up a list of 142 Zimbabweans killed in political violence since
2000. Only 11 were white, and almost all of the remaining 131
were supporters of the opposition Movement for Democratic Change
(MDC). Mugabe thugs have also killed another 115 black farm workers.
Their crime is to have opposed the campaign against whites.
Many blacks who worked for white
farmers were happy with their jobs, and knew ruin would follow
the land grabs. Very few blacks can operate a modern, commercial
farm, and when whites are run off production grinds to a halt.
Any black worker who shows the slightest hint of support for whites
or for the opposition MDC becomes an enemy of the people.
The war veterans have operated like Maoist Red Guards,
forcing farm workers to attend political rallies where they were
made to identify MDC supporters. The Mugabe thugs then beat the
opposition supporters or make other workers beat them. The farm
invaders also love to make people sing songs in praise of Mr.
Mugabe and his party for hours at a time. They have burned some
farm workers out of their homes and looted many others.
In the Karoi district, black workers
reported more than 1,000 cases of assault by Mugabe gangs in the
two-month period of June and July 2000 alone. The police did nothing.
After farmers and black workers complained, the local police chief,
Superintendent Mabunda, responded with threats: Do you want
war? If you want war, I will bring troops and we can have war.
I think we will have war today.
A huge number of blacks lost homes,
jobs, and access to schools and medicine, as the war veterans
rampaged through the country, shutting down farms. Many once-prosperous
farms are now looted, overgrown wrecks, and food production has
plummeted. Many of the high-ranking blacks who have officially
taken possession do not even pretend to farm. They live in the
cities and come out for picnics.
According to the Zimbabwe Agricultural
Welfare Trust (ZAWT), an organization that helps blacks suffering
from the chaos of Mr. Mugabes polices, between February
2000 and the end of 2002, about 1,300 commercial farmers were
forced to stop farming. An estimated 200,000 farm workers have
lost either their homes or their jobs since the farm invasions
began, and this figure does not include wives and children. The
majority of displaced workers have nowhere to go. Countless thousands
are now scattered around the farming areas, sometimes simply camping
along roadsides with no possessions. They join the estimated 600,000
internally displaced people in Zimbabwe. It is not
well known that a few prosperous blacks have lost farms. Anyone
identified with the opposition can be treated just like a white.
The brown areas in
the eastern part
of the country were a lush green
before whites were driven off.
Now Zimbabwe faces famine.
The economic consequences of raping
the countryside have been immense. While it is true that southern
Africa is suffering from drought, there is no doubt that the food
crisis now facing Zimbabwe is the result of Mr. Mugabes
land policy. When whites could still farm freely, Zimbabwe was
the breadbasket of southern Africa, and exported a range of food
products. Now there are only an estimated 350 commercial farmers
left, many operating under impossible conditions.
The catastrophic drop in food production
means that an estimated eight million of Zimbabwes 13 million
people face starvation, according to the UN and other international
bodies. Corn mealthe staple foodbread, milk, sugar
and other commodities are scarce, and long lines are common. In
the Masvingo district, a BBC reporter was shocked to find Zimbabweans
scratching in the dirt looking for roots to eat. Other journalists
have found Zimbabweans eating rats, river silt and poisonous plants
in order to fill their stomachs.
The entire economy is starving.
Tobacco, once the leading export product, was largely grown by
white farmers. Now, hard currency shortages mean gas stations
run dry. Finance Minister Simba Makoni admits the country is bankrupt.
No one is investing in the country, nor is there any likelihood
anyone will, and there is no foreign currency available to import
food, he says, in a rare display of government honesty.
Food reliefthe United States is a major donoris distributed
along political lines, further consolidating Mr. Mugabes
When black rule began, Zimbabwe
still had all the institutions of Western government whites had
set up, and although Mr. Mugabe has essentially dictatorial powers,
he has not yet completely destroyed these institutions. For example,
Zimbabwe still has elections, in which political opponents run
for office against the ruling Zanu-PF party. In the early years,
Mr. Mugabe could afford to hold elections with relatively little
vote-rigging because he and his movement were still popular. Now
he rules through force and intimidation, and opposition politics
is a dangerous career.
In connection with the June 2000
parliamentary elections alone, Mugabe supporters murdered more
than 30 political opponents. Dozens of opposition politicians
have been arrested, assaulted, or had their homes attacked. Human
rights groups charge that during the elections there were more
than 19,000 cases of politically-motivated violence and torture.
Since the vote, Mugabe thugs have killed another estimated 60
to 80 opposition supporters. The elections themselves were spectacularly
corrupt, but still left opposition parties with 48 percent of
the 120 contested seats (30 parliamentarians are directly appointed
by Mr. Mugabe, so the MDC has 57 of 150 seats).
Another gift of white Rhodesians
to black Zimbabwe was a tradition of press freedom, a tradition
Mr. Mugabe has gradually snuffed out. During 2002, the authorities
threw two journalists in jail, detained 32, and assaulted five.
The offices of the Daily News, the one remaining independent
paper, have been firebombed three times in the last two years.
In May, police forced the last foreign correspondent, Andrew Meldrum,
onto a plane and expelled him for publishing false news.
A once-independent police and judiciary
are yet more casualties of black rule. According to the Amani
Trust in Harare, which monitors human rights abuses, the police
have been purged of anyone suspected of disloyalty to the regime,
so that the force is now effectively another Zanu-PF militia.
This is why appeals for help from whites or political opponents
are fruitless, and why attackers are not prosecuted. The army
and the Central Intelligence Organizationthe Zimbabwe secret
police, which is accountable only to Mr. Mugabeare just
as partisan. At a political rally in 2000, then Zimbabwean defense
minister Moven Mahachi explained how to handle the opposition:
We will move door to door, killing . . . . I am the minister
responsible for defense; therefore I am capable of killing.
All public employees soon learn
where their primary loyalty must lie. In June 2001, Mr. Mugabes
foreign minister, Stan Mudenge, told trainee teachers: As
civil servants, you have to be loyal to the government of the
day. You can even be killed for supporting the opposition, and
no one would guarantee your safety.
Ursula Frost with her
boyfriend, farm manager Duncan Cooke. In
December 2001, six government
officials were inspecting farm land
for expropriation. When Mr. Cooke
asked them to move their car so he
could drive a tractor past it, one of
the men slashed him with a machete.
Judges, respected and independent
when they were Rhodesian, are now tools of the regime. Many magistrates
are Zanu-PF-appointees or are too intimidated to act against the
government. In March 2001, the government forced the countrys
chief justice, Anthony Gubbay, into early retirement after he
ruled against the seizure of white-owned farms. Other judges who
tried to take a stand have resigned after threats to their lives
and families. Courts have issued at least two orders to the authorities
to clear farm invaders off private land, but the government paid
A Zimbabwean High Court judge, Ben
Hlatshwayo, ignored an order by his own court barring him from
moving onto a farm confiscated from a white family. In December
2002, Mr. Hlatshwayo moved onto the 900-acre farm anyway, accompanied
by a police escort.
While the government ignores the
courts at will, it uses the law as a weapon against opponents.
The MDC leader, Morgan Tsvangirai, is on trial for allegedly plotting
to assassinate Mr. Mugabe, and could be put to death if found
The causes of Zimbabwes misery
are so clear that many people continue to risk death to oppose
Mr. Mugabe. In early June, the government sent tanks into the
street to put down what was to be a five-day general strike called
in the hope of driving Mr. Mugabe from office.
Ben Hlatshwayo had conveniently
issued an injunction against the strike, and police arrested Mr.
Tsvangirai for the capital crime of treason. Police disperesed
demonstrators with live fire, tear gas, and water cannon. There
were hundreds of injuries, but miraculously, no one was killed.
Interest and Admiration
Although Zimbabwes measures
against white farmers are destroying the country, and have been
met with universal condemnation in the West, Africans look on
with interest and admiration. Most ominous is the reaction in
South Africa, which has had a less well-publicized campaign of
murdering white farmers. In August 2001, South Africa sent its
agriculture minister to Zimbabwe to discuss helping understand
farmer settlement, and in October 2001, South Africas
Deputy President, Jacob Zuma, said Mr. Mugabe had convincingly
explained his land policies. South African Labor Minister,
Membathisi Mdladlana said in Zimbabwe on January 11, 2003, that
his country had a lot to learn from President Robert Mugabes
program of land reform.
When Mr. Mugabes government
expelled outspoken journalist Mercedes Sayagues, the foreign affairs
spokesman for the ruling African National Congress (ANC), Ronnie
Mamoepa, said he had no reason to doubt Zimbabwes explanation
that the expulsion was not a threat to press freedom. Likewise,
South African Justice Minister Penuell Maduna argues that measures
taken against judges do not undermine judicial independence or
the rule of law. In March 2001, Frank Chikane, Director-General
of the South African presidency, announced that his government
believes there are no human rights abuses in Zimbabwe. Other African
countries are just as supportive. A meeting in Angola in December
2001 of African heads of state from the 14-nation Southern Africa
Development Community (SADC) unequivocally backed Mr. Mugabes
leadership, and refused to impose sanctions of any kind.
Particularly worrisome for white
South Africans is the Amendment to the Land Restitution
Act promulgated by the government on May 9, 2003, and likely
to pass easily in the ANC-dominated parliament. It is an almost
perfect copy of the Zimbabwean farm seizure legislation, and will
give the South African Minister of Agriculture and Land Affairs
the power to take urban or rural land without any judicial process
if it is in the interests of land reform. At present,
land can be redistributed only by court order and
if there is an agreement between the current owner and the claimant
of the land. The ANC clearly intends to follow the Mugabe path.
Although observers from Europe and
the United States dismissed the March 2002 presidential electionwon
handily by Mr. Mugabeas a fraud, the head of the South African
observation team said the vote was legitimate, and that the ANC
sent warm congratulations. Other African heads of
state endorsed the elections. Benjamin Mkapa of Tanzania even
called Mr. Mugabe a champion of democracy, and a spokesman
for Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo said his government would
urge Europe and the United States to accept the election results.
President Daniel Arap Moi of Kenya sent his congratulations. Namibia
conveyed its warmest congratulations to His Excellency,
Comrade Robert Gabriel Mugabe, and President Sam Nujoma
announced plans for a farm seizure program of his own.
The Organization of African Unity
(OAU) observer team in Zimbabwe reported that in general
the elections were transparent, credible, free and fair.
By African standards, of course, the election was entirely as
it should be: it kept the incumbent in power.
A wide-spread view of Mr. Mugabe
was expressed in New African magazine, which is read all
over the continent. Its May 2000 cover story was unequivocal:
Mugabe is Right.
Africans everywhere seem to love
Mr. Mugabe. Last September 12, after addressing a session of the
UN General Assembly in New York, he accepted an invitation to
speak at New Yorks City Council chambers, where he gave
a long talk about his land policies to a dozen or so members of
the City Councils Black and Hispanic Caucus. Charles Barron,
a former Black Panther, and the council member who had invited
Mr. Mugabe to City Hall, hugged him and held his hand aloft like
a victorious boxer. No council member protested the visit.
South Africa offers Zimbabwe material
as well as moral support, providing seed, fertilizer, fuel and
transportation aid under the terms of an aid package signed in
October 2002. The state-owned South African electricity and oil
companies, Eskom and Sasol, supply Zimbabwe on creditsomething
no one else will doand have very little chance of collecting
on tens of millions of dollars worth of debt. The cost is borne
by South Africans, of whom the largest number of paying customers
are white. The continuing cost of ANC support for Zimbabwe has
been reflected in the currency markets; the South African rand
lost 25 percent of its value in 2000 alone, and has declined steadily
ever since. The countrys annual inflation rate is more than
Mr. Mugabe will probably succeed
in driving whites out of the country. Some he will force out physically,
and others will leave voluntarily as Zimbabwe sinks further into
There was a time, not so long ago,
when whites could not have been treated this way. In 1866, Emperor
Theodore of Abyssinia (now Ethiopia) imprisoned a number of British
subjects, claiming Britain was not showing his regime enough respect.
Diplomacy failed, and the emperor took his hostages 400 miles
inland to the mountain fortress of Magdala. Under orders from
the prime minister and Queen Victoria, Sir Robert Napier equipped
an army of 13,000 British and Indians in Bombay, loaded the men
and nearly 30,000 head of livestock (including 44 elephants) onto
a great fleet, and sailed across the Indian Ocean to Massowah
on the Red Sea coast. It took three months to march the men through
the parched, mountainous wilderness to Magdala, where Napier reduced
the fort and rescued the hostages. Emperor Theodore committed
That was a time when Britainand
the white manwere not to be trifled with. Other nations
took note, just as Namibia and South Africa are now taking note
of Britains spinelessness as Mr. Mugabe drives whites off
the land. Action in defense of ones people is strictly a
question of will, which the British once had but now do not. They
could arrange a regime change in Zimbabwe with one
20th of the men they sent to Iraq, but the British are now incapable
of using force to defend race and heritage.
Zimbabwe teaches several lessons.
Two are all too familiar: blacks make a mess of Western institutions,
and some will brutalize whites if they get the chance. South Africa
will meet the same fate; it is only a matter of time. But losing
southern Africa to savagery is far less important than the fact
that Britain, the United States, and all other European countries
are letting it happen. If the British cannot bring themselves
to save their Zimbabwean cousins from white-hating barbarians,
they cannot be counted on to save themselves either. If immigration
continues, and dispossession comes to the home islands, there
will be no mother country to ignore their pleas for help.
Arthur Kemp is a Rhodesian-born
journalist and author.
• BACK TO TOP • •
South African Defense Force, once by far the strongest army
on the African continent, has dissolved into near-anarchy since
the introduction of black rule in 1994. Fewer than half of its
soldiers are medically fit, it has an AIDS infection
rate estimated at 60 percent, and its equipment is deteriorating
to the point that the country has only four working tanks and
eight armored cars. The decline began after the handover of
power to the ANC, when members of the armed wings of both the
ANC, and a smaller more radical black movement, the Pan African
Congress (PAC), were incorporated into what was renamed the
South African National Defense Force (SANDF).
Incorporation has not always been
smooth. On September 16, 1999, a former PAC guerilla inducted
into the SANDF went on a rampage, killing and wounding whites
at the Tempe military base in Bloemfontein. The leader of a
special police investigations team reported he was reluctantly
forced to admit that Lieutenant Sibusiso Madubela, 28,
brushed aside black colleagues in order to shoot only whites,
killing six officers and a civilian woman, and wounding five
soldiers. Another soldier later died of his wounds.
Since then, whites have slowly
been squeezed out of the army, leaving an overwhelmingly black
forcewith predictable consequences. A South African parliamentary
subcommittee briefing on defense, held in July 2002, found that:
* More than half
of South Africas 76,000 soldiers were medically
unfit for duty.
* The SANDF could
deploy only one operational brigade of 3,000 men.
* Training had virtually
come to a halt.
* Equipment was in
a deplorable state, with only four out of 168 Olifant
tanks and eight of 242 Rooikat armored cars still operational.
* There was not enough
money to buy fuel. In the air force, funds were allocated
for only 2,400 flying hours instead of the 7,200 requested,
and pilots were resigning in droves. The air force
usually runs out of aviation fuel every September,
said a member of the committee that handles military matters.
* Reduction of the
armed forces from 104,000 in 1994 to the present 76,000
involved massive cash payouts that, according to committee
member Hendrik Schmidt, turned the defense force into
an armed welfare department.
* The force was seriously
top-heavy, with a ratio of one general for every 293 men,
compared to one general for every 2,000 men in the United
* More than 52 percent
of the defense budget was spent on personnel, and only
0.5 percent on new equipment.
* Seven out of every
10 deaths in the armed forces were AIDS-related. A medical
specialist at a military hospital said six out of every
10 soldiers admitted to hospital tested HIV-positive,
and that an AIDS infection rate of 60 percent was feasible.
Rooikat: too hard
Some details of the decline of
the SANDF seem almost comical. In August 2002, Colonel T.C.
Mokhosi, who commands the 1st South African Infantry Battalion,
told another parliamentary subcommittee that dental reasons
explain why only 138 of his 612 men can be deployed internationally.
Presumably 77.5 percent of his men have such bad teeth they
are unfit for service, but the SANDF refuses to elaborate. Col.
Mokhosi also told MPs that his battalion turns in 175 sick notices
a week in the winter, which prevents it from participating in
certain training programs. Many of the armys other 38,000
unfit soldiers reportedly have dental problems, too.
Generals have faked their qualifications
to land plum jobs. At least two, Ernest Zwane and Petronella
Mari, both from the ANCs armed wing, were arrested in
November 2002 for forging university qualifications. The year
before, police arrested two other former ANC fighters, a colonel
and an ex-colonel, on charges of diverting about R20 million
from the SANDF demobilization fund in 2001. Upon learning of
the scandal, Defense Minister Mosiuoa Lekota replied, I
remain satisfied that there is nothing we cannot deal with.
• • • BACK TO TOP • •
Science Under Fire
foundation that kept racial science alive.
reviewed by Ian Jobling
of Human Diversity:
A History of the Pioneer Fund
of America, 2001, $54.50 (soft cover), 643 pp.
lthough it is a small foundation
that oversees a modest endowment and has no paid staff,
the Pioneer Fund has, since its inception in 1937, changed
the face of social science and the public understanding
of race and human genetics. Without the Pioneer Fund, there
would probably be very little scientific data on race differences
in intelligence and behavior. Most of the major research
in this area has been done by Pioneer grantees, such as
Audrey Shuey, Frank C. J. McGurk, R. Travis Osborne, Arthur
R. Jensen, J. Philippe Rushton, Linda S. Gottfredson, and
Richard Lynn. Pioneer grantees such as Prof. Lynn, William
B. Shockley, Seymour W. Itzkoff, and Daniel R. Vining have
also done almost all the recent work on dysgenic fertility,
and have been the most forceful advocates of eugenics in
Pioneer also made possible
Thomas J. Bouchards landmark Minnesota Twin Project,
which showed that identical twins reared apart are vastly
more similar than fraternal twins reared together. Although
Pioneer did not finance Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles
Murrays The Bell Curve, this book relied heavily
on the ideas and findings of the thirteen Pioneer grantees
cited in it. As Prof. Jensen has said, The name Pioneer
is indeed very apt.
For its staunch and unyielding
defiance of political correctness, the fund has drawn the
abuse of journalistic and academic swastika-painters. This
was especially true around the time of the publication of
The Bell Curve, which may have publicized Pioneer-supported
ideas more successfully than any other book in American
publishing history. The Science of Human Diversity opens
with a description of the media pogrom launched against
the fund on ABCs World News Tonight in 1994
by Peter Jennings, who spiced his commentary with pictures
of emaciated victims of the Nazi camps. On the same program,
journalist Greg Easterbrook called the fund an Aryan
crank organization, and professional anti-racist Barry
Mehler complained about its dirty money. Hysterical
attacks of this kind have prompted picketing of Pioneer
scholars, attacks by student groups, and abuse and obstruction
by university officials.
Founders and Scholars
Although the 50-page preface
by Harry F. Weyher, president of the fund from 1958 until
his death in 2002, includes vivid portraits of a number
of Pioneer founders and scholars, this book is mainly a
summary of their work. Author Richard Lynn, an emeritus
professor of University of Ulster in Northern Ireland, and
a major grantee, also provides valuable information about
the calumny the pioneers have suffered, and describes some
of their disputes with intellectual adversaries.
Persecution and hatred have
been the result of Pioneer scholars powerful assaults
on the great lie of this countrys intellectual and
political elites: the lie that human nature could be molded
to suit utopian political reformers. Assuming that human
nature was infinitely malleable, these reformers believed
they could eliminate racial divisions, make blacks equal
to whites, integrate Third-World immigrants, abolish traditional
sex roles, and otherwise rid American society of what they
deemed to be backward prejudices (see March, 2003 review
of The Blank Slate).
Pioneer grantees stubbornly
insisted on the biological obstacles to this utopian vision.
They argued that social engineering could never overcome
racial differences in intelligence and personality, that
racial integration would fail because humans have a natural
preference for their own race, that mass Third-World immigration
was tantamount to white genocide, and that the elimination
of traditional sex roles would have a devastating dysgenic
impact on fertility. They maintained that biological problems
require biological solutions, and that current social welfare
programs encourage reproduction by the weak, the stupid,
and the irresponsible. An improvement in the quality of
a population requires a decrease in the frequency of undesirable
genes and an increase in desirable ones. The wrath that
has greeted Pioneer scholars is, in short, that of the charlatan
and his dupes against the doctor who discredits quack cures
and insists upon less palatable medicine.
Many of the scientific findings
summarized in the book will already be known to readers
of AR, but The Science of Human Diversity offers
a wealth of detail on dysgenics, eugenics, and the biological
bases of personality and race differences. This book also
impresses on ones mind just how long the basic facts
about race differences have been known and how long the
academic establishment has refused to recognize them. Certainly,
this refusal has been unforgivable since at least 1958,
when Audrey M. Shuey produced her encyclopedic The Testing
of Negro Intelligence.
The main force behind the
establishment of the Pioneer Fund was Wickliffe Preston
Draper, born in 1891, and heir to a fortune made in textile
machinery. Drapers life was characterized by a relentless
thirst for knowledge and adventure. As a young man, he traveled
on horseback through Mexico and witnessed the Zapatista
revolution. Later, he did anthropological and archaeological
research in Africa. He served in both World Wars, in the
first as an artillery soldier and in the second as an intelligence
officer in India.
Drapers overriding intellectual
interest was dysgenic trends in Western populations. In
1928 he established the Eugenics Research Association Prize,
awarded to scholars who wrote about dysgenic fertility,
the decline of white birthrates, and racial differences.
He also believed Americas greatness was made possible
by racial homogeneity, and was a strong supporter of the
1924 Immigration Act, which privileged the immigration of
Northern Europeans. He supported activist groups that wished
to repatriate blacks to Africa and that opposed racial integration.
Draper also funded the work of two Congressional committees
that opposed John F. Kennedys disastrous immigration
reform in the 1960s.
Draper established the Pioneer
Fund in 1937 with fellow eugenicists Harry H. Laughlin and
Frederick H. Osborn. The Funds Certificate of Incorporation
explained its objectives: First, it would provide financial
assistance for the education of the children of parents
who had such qualities and traits of character as
to make such parents of unusual value as citizens.
Especially to be aided were the descendants of the inhabitants
of the original thirteen American colonies and those of
related stocks. Essentially, Drapers first
goal was to pay gifted people of northern European descent
to have more children. Second, Pioneer would fund the study
of heredity and eugenics.
While the fund has been spectacularly
successful in carrying out the second objective, the same
cannot be said of the first. Pioneer has funded only one
eugenic project, the Air Corps scholarship plan, which started
in 1937. It began with a study of the fertility of officers
in the US Army Air Corps (predecessor to the Air Force),
who were thought to have the fitness, intelligence, courage,
and character the fund wished to promote. This study found
that the officers families were not replacing themselves,
and that they wanted more children, but were restrained
by financial considerations. The fund promised $4,000 for
the education of every additional child born to families
that already had three children. This assistance was provided
only for children born in 1941, after which the plan was
discontinued. Prof. Lynn estimates that it resulted in the
birth of only seven children, and believes there were no
more Pioneer eugenic programs because the Air Corps project
proved how difficult and expensive they were.
Aside from their scientific
work, fund recipients have opposed the racial integration
forced on Americans since Brown v. Board of Education
in 1954. Writing immediately after the historic case, Pioneer
grantee Ernest van den Haag defended school and neighborhood
segregation on the principle of free association. He argued
that even if white preference for segregation were based
on prejudice, prejudice is not illegal, and the Constitution
gives the government no mandate to combat ideas. The policy
of compulsory togetherness was more likely to
exacerbate racial problems than solve them.
Writing in the 1960s, University
of Hawaii philosophy professor A. James Gregor wrote that
ethnocentrism was such a strong human attribute that it
was unlikely racial integration would be successful. Anticipating
J. P. Rushtons genetic similarity theory,
Prof. Gregor wrote that we prefer to associate with people
of our own race because of innate aesthetic preferences.
He wrote that feelings of racial identity emerge early in
children, typically by the age of four or five, and that
for this reason racial segregation is the natural human
state. Prof. Gregor also found that racial integration lowered
the quality of education because black/white differences
in intelligence and behavior result in lower standards.
He also noted that all-white communities are safer than
Prof. Lynn describes some
of the silliness Prof. Gregor was combating. One opponent
was psychologist Marie Jahoda, who claimed that racial prejudice
was a form of psychological disorder. She argued that in
thinking blacks were lazy, childish, and promiscuous, whites
were projecting on them their own repressed urges, and that
the only solution to this problem was forced residential
integration. Prof. Gregors position was that speculative
gymnastics of this kind obscures the nature
and character of social problems.
Several other Pioneer scholars
opposed integration. In the 1970s and 80s, University
of Northern Iowa psychologist Ralph Scott reported that
busing did not improve black student performance, and that
even black parents overwhelmingly opposed it. He argued
that racial integration was the reason American education
compared poorly to that of other developed countries, since
the main effect of school integration was to hold back gifted
In 1991, pscyhologist Lloyd
G. Humphreys pointed out that many whites had fled to the
suburbs to avoid racially integrated schools. He attacked
the obvious hypocrisy of liberals like Senator Edward Kennedy,
who advocates integration for public schools, but sends
his own children to private schools. Rich liberals rarely
support integration in their own neighborhoods, but insist
on it for the lower classes.
An even more common target
of fund recipients has been affirmative action. Prof. Humphreys
called attention to lowered standards at Harvard Medical
School, which began to let failing students take more repeat
examinations, and stopped publishing students scores
after it started letting in underqualified minorities.
University of Delaware psychologist
Linda S. Gottfredson, an expert on aptitude tests, helped
abolish race norming. Introduced in 1981, this
was a system of separate evaluation standards for different
races on employment examinations. Prof. Gottfredson and
her colleague Jan Blits point out that race norming gave
blacks and Hispanics an unfair advantage; race norming was
banned by the Civil Rights Act of 1991.
In his 1998 book Why Race
Matters, Pioneer grantee and City College of New York
philosopher Michael Levin demolished the premises of affirmative
action and other forms of reparations: that whites have
harmed blacks, who therefore deserve compensation. He pointed
out that almost all African slaves were sold to whites by
other Africans, and that the descendants of slaves enjoy
a much higher standard of living than Africans. It is therefore
not unreasonable to conclude that the slave trade benefited
blacks. He argues further that in light of black criminality
and destruction of housing stock, it would be more reasonable
for whites to demand reparations from blacks.
As part of a detailed analysis
of racial differences in intelligence and behavior, Prof.
Levin applies his subversive common sense to the question
of discrimination. If blacks are ten times more likely than
whites to commit certain crimes, it is rational to be more
suspicious of them. Likewise, it is no more reprehensible
for an employer to deny a job to a black than it is for
a landlord to refuse to rent a room to a motorcycle gang
member, since blacks and Hells Angels are more likely
than others to be criminals or behave obnoxiously.
Among Pioneer grantees, the
most significant advocate of immigration reform has been
ecologist Garrett Hardin, emeritus of University of California
at Santa Barbara. Prof. Hardin estimated that the carrying
capacity of the earth was reached during the last quarter
of the 20th century, and that further population growth
would lower the quality of life. In the United States and
Europe, fertility is low, so whites would not suffer the
ills of overpopulation unless there was immigration. He
popularized the metaphor of the lifeboat: When the boat
is full, no one else should be allowed on board. Letting
on more is a perverse variant of compassion that will sink
Prof. Hardin also wrote that
Western societies practice a strange reversal of ethnocentrism
that he called ethnofugalism: that which
is foreign and strange, particularly if persecuted, [has
become] the ideal. He noted that, like the citizens
of Beirut, we are not likely to find it ideal for long.
That city, once called the Paris of the Mediterranean, was
torn apart by ethnic conflict. Prof. Hardin believes immigration
is genocide, albeit of a relatively bloodless kind. Genocide
is the elimination of one people by another, and is inevitable
when highly fertile non-white immigrants arrive among less
fertile whites. (It displaces natives even when immigrants
are not especially fertilesee AR, Feb. 2003.)
Several fund recipients have
proposed eugenic improvement of the American population.
The outstanding figure in this field was William Shockley,
the colorful Nobel Prize-winning physicist, who became a
tireless advocate of eugenics, after realizing the dangers
of dysgenic fertility. He said he was converted by a news
story about a teenager who blinded a delicatessen owner
during a robbery. The criminal was one of 17 illegitimate
children of a woman with an IQ of 55 who could remember
the names of only nine of her children. The robber himself
had an IQ of 65, and Dr. Shockley was horrified to think
that some day such people might become a majority in America.
Dr. Shockley proposed several
eugenic policies, one of which has already been put into
effect: the establishment of sperm banks for gifted donors.
Some of his other ideas were very imaginative. He proposed
that people with below-average IQs be paid to be sterilized.
For every point below 100, they would receive $1,000, so
someone with an IQ of 90 would get $10,000, and one with
70 would get $30,000. He also proposed that girls be fitted
at puberty with contraceptives that could be removed only
by a doctor. Every woman would have a license for 2.2 children
and would have to buy the licenses of other women if they
wanted more. Dr. Shockley predicted that poor women would
sell their licenses to rich women, which would skew fertility
toward superior people.
Another eugenicist Pioneer
grantee is Seymour Itzkoff, psychology professor at Smith
College. Prof. Itzkoff believes the quality of the population
is declining because welfare raises the fertility of the
poor, feminism encourages intelligent women to have careers
rather than children, and because of Third-World immigration.
He suggests that high-paying jobs be given preferentially
to married men with families, that the tax code be amended
to reward higher-earning people who have children and punish
those who do not, that strong measures be taken to discourage
illegitimate births, and that illegal immigrants be repatriated.
Although Pioneer grantees
have been called many names, they have diagnosed the nature
and causes of American social problems more accurately than
conventional thinkers. Just as Profs. van den Haag, Gregor,
Scott, and Humphreys predicted, the attempt to integrate
Americas schools and neighborhoods has been a failure.
Demographers tell us American neighborhoods are almost as
segregated today as they were before the Civil Rights Act
of 1964. Just this year, Harvard University scholars announced
that schools are still highly segregated and are becoming
more so. Forced busing has encountered fierce resistance
and has been, for the most part, abandoned. Similarly, affirmative
action programs in education are under attack for precisely
the reasons Pioneer grantees have specified. The notorious
under-performance of todays students and the rise
in prison populations suggest that Pioneer grantees have
been correct about the declining quality of the population.
The ever-increasing percentage of immigrant minorities in
America and Europe confirms Prof. Hardins prediction
of white genocide.
Prof. Lynn points out that
much Pioneer research has been pursued in the teeth of fierce
resistance from academics. In the 1990s, three universities
refused to accept Pioneer grants made to their scholars
because of negative publicity about the fund. In only one
case, that of Hans J. Eysenck of University of London, was
this refusal allowed to stand. In the two other cases, those
of Linda S. Gottfredson and Seymour Itzkoff, the refusals
were overturned by the courts. Universities have also tried
unsuccessfully to revoke tenure and dismiss Prof. Rushton
and Prof. Levin.
Universities have tried to
repress Pioneer-funded research with threats and red tape.
Courts have eventually enforced most university obligations,
but litigation ties up scholars time and is a huge
worry. Prof. Levins and Prof. Rushtons ordeals
are well summarized in Samuel Franciss essay in The
Real American Dilemma, but Linda Gottfredsons
case is just as interesting, and reveals much about the
current university mentality. Trouble began in 1989 when
a linguistics professor at University of Delaware wrote
a letter to the dean complaining that the fund that was
aiding Prof. Gottfredson sponsored racist research. In 1990,
Prof. Gottfredson got menacing calls from university officials
calling her a lightning rod, and advising her
to get a lawyer. The university then refused to administer
the Pioneer grant, claiming that the funds aims and
the research it sponsored were clearly and unambiguously
in conflict with the Universitys commitment to racial
and cultural diversity. Administrators told Prof.
Gottfredson that if she found some independent way of receiving
Pioneer money, she could not use university facilities,
and it would not count towards her research requirements.
It took two years of litigation to overturn the universitys
Besides being harassed by
their universities, many scholars have been picketed, hectored,
and physically attacked by radical groups. Students invaded
and vandalized Seymour Itzkoffs office and attacked
his home. Radicals have demonstrated noisily at Profs. Lynns,
Jensens, and Eysencks classes.
A more insidious and effective
method of silencing scholars is to refuse to publish their
work. Audrey M. Shueys carefully researched The
Testing of Negro Intelligence could find no publisher
until Draper financed the book in 1958. Eight publishers
turned down Prof. Jensens authoritative The g Factor
before it was finally published in 1998, and Prof. Jensen
has found that politically incorrect articles have to pass
an unreasonably stiff review process. Many prominent journals
search out reviewers who can find, or invent, some flaw
in the methodology of any article that may be politically
insensitive. Small presses are often the only ones that
publish insensitive books, and may have to charge
exorbitant prices. The Science of Human Diversity,
which costs $54.50 in paperback, is an unfortunate example.
Prof. Lynn is very optimistic
about the future of the fund. He believes the public is
becoming more open to IQ research and the evolutionary-genetic
approach to human behavior because of the largely positive
publicity behavioral and medical genetics have received
in the press. Citing a positive 1994 New York Times review
of The Bell Curve and of books by Prof. Rushton and
Prof. Itzkoff, he says the tide has started to turn, and
he looks forward with excitement to the next 60 years of
Pioneer-funded research. Another reason to be optimistic
about the future of Pioneer is that Prof. Rushton is its
I hope Prof. Lynn is right.
Widespread hostility has not so far stopped Pioneer scholars
from stating their ideas, but it may well have discouraged
younger scholars from pursuing these topics. All of the
currently living Pioneer grantees are over 50 years old.
One wonders how many young scholars are willing to take
the risks the pioneers have taken. Prof. Jensen has noted
that adopting the hereditarian position limits a Ph.D.s
job opportunities and can jeopardize promotions, honors,
and grants. Even stating well-established findings about
the nature of the races can be prosecuted as hate speech
on some university campuses. The non-whites pouring into
white countries have never been known for their commitment
to free speech. Unless this tide is stopped, our country
may cease to be one in which the Pioneer Fund and its grantees
can continue to operate freely.
Dr. Jobling lives in Buffalo,
New York. He holds a Ph.D. in Comparative Literature.
inmate punished for writing.
by Stephen Webster
Bryan Sorens has been in a Texas prison for 19 years, serving
a 60-year sentence for rape. He has used his time constructively,
earning two Masters degrees, and writing articles
about prison life and other topics for publication, for
which he is usually paid. His work has appeared in Christian
and racialist publications, newspapers like the San Antonio
Express- News, and even Playboy. He has been
in discussion with American Renaissance about several
Mr. Sorens supports harsh
punishment for criminalshe says it has worked for
himand he was scheduled to be considered for release
in December 2005. However, on March 18, prison authorities
gave Mr. Sorens another year as punishment. His crime? Receiving
pay for writing. According to Texas Department of Criminal
Justice (TDCJ) regulations, inmates may not establish or
operate businesses, and Mr. Sorens, they say, was in the
business of selling articles.
Mr. Sorens says he is being
singled out because for the last two years, he has criticized
the TDCJ for lax security and for coddling Islamic prisoners.
He also writes with a clear understanding of racial matters
the TDCJ prefers to ignore. During the hearing at which
he was sentenced to the additional year, Mr. Sorens says
Warden Gary G. More of his unit told him he was being punished
for all those newspaper articles you wrote.
Mr. Sorens has written for
pay almost as long as he has been in prison, and no one
objected. Other Texas inmates are paid for articles and
even books, and have not been punished. Jorge Antonio Renaud,
an armed robber, writes regularly for Texas newspapers and
had a bookBehind the Wallspublished last
year by the University of North Texas Press. I have
never been threatened with disciplinary action for my writing,
says Mr. Renaud. Its not as if they dont
know Im getting paid, he adds, pointing out
that his checks are deposited in the Inmate Trust Fund,
which prisoners use to buy things at the commissary.
Mr. Sorens may sue the TDCJ,
and appears to have case law on his side. In 1998, the US
Third Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a Pennsylvania
courts ruling and ordered that convicted cop killer
Mumia Abu-Jamal be allowed to receive payment for articles
and radio programs. Still, a TDCJ lawyer believes he can
convince a court there is a clear penological rationalization
for punishing Mr. Sorens. In the meantime, Mr. Sorens has
been silenced; who knows how many more years of prison he
would get if he continued to write?
You can help Mr. Sorens by
writing to these three Texas state representatives (or you
can send them e-mail by searching for them at http://www.capitol.
Rep. Terri Hodge
Austin, TX 78769-2910
Rep. Ray Allen
Austin, TX 78769-2910
Sen. John Whitmore
Austin, TX 78711-2068
You can also write
Admin. & Constituent Services
Office of the Governor
Austin, TX 78711-2404
If you write, please include
the words: Information of Public Interest Complaint,
Texas Government Code Sec. 493.016, E.D. 02.03. Also,
it is useful to explain how Mr. Sorenss punishment
harms the public, i.e., by denying people the right to read
• • •
BACK TO TOP • •
O Tempora, O Mores!
Hard to find him when
are looking for a white man.
For some time, Baton Rouge was terrorized
by a rapist-serial killer. Police had DNA evidence to link the
murders but did not know how to use DNA to determine the killers
race. On the basis of a purported eyewitness description and a
behavioral profile from the FBI, they were looking for a white
man. A Multi-Agency Homicide Task Force formed in August 2002
collected more than 600 DNA samples from potential suspectsall
In February 2003, Tony Frudakis,
CEO of DNAPrint Genomics (see Race Denial: The Power of
a Delusion, in last months issue) contacted the task
force, explaining that his company had a new DNA test that could
determine the killers race with 99 percent accuracy. While
his lab was analyzing the sample the killer struck again, murdering
his fifth victim and fourth white. That same week, in early March,
Mr. Frudakis told police the killer they were looking for was
black85 percent African and 15 percent American Indian.
The task force began collecting DNA from black suspects.
Detectives already had DNA from
a different murder investigation for Derrick Lee, a 34-year-old
black man, and on May 25, a police technician matched it to the
samples recovered from the five victims. The next day, police
issued a warrant for his arrest, and captured him a day later
in Atlanta. [Rachael Bell, The Mystery of the Baton Rouge Serial
Killer, CrimeLibrary.com. Josh Noel, Florida Lab Pointed to Race,
The Advocate (Baton Rouge), June 4, 2003.]
It would be hard to think of a more
dramatic demonstration that race is a biological fact and not
a social construct.
Cannot be Wished Away
The New York Times has recently
been quite bold in upholding the common sense view that race is
not a mere sociological artifact but a biological reality. In
a recent article, Nicholas Wade writes:
A view widespread among many
social scientists, endorsed in official statements by the American
Sociological Association and the American Anthropological Association,
is that race is not a valid biological concept. But biologists,
particularly the population geneticists who study genetic variation,
have found that there is a structure in the human population.
The structure is a family tree showing separate branches for Africans,
Caucasians (Europe, the Middle East and the Indian subcontinent),
East Asians, Pacific Islanders and American Indians.
Biologists, too, have often
been reluctant to use the term race. But this taboo
was broken last year by Dr. Neil Risch, a leading population geneticist
at Stanford University.
Vexed by an editorial in The
New England Journal [of Medicine (NEJM)] that declared
that race was biologically meaningless, Dr. Risch
argued in the electronic journal Genome Biology that self-identified
race was useful in understanding ethnic differences in disease
and in the response to drugs.
The news peg for Mr. Wades
article was the appearance in the NEJM of two articles that reopen
the debate on race two years after a staff-written editorial dismissed
its scientific validity. The debate is accompanied by a new editorial
taking the view that it is unwise to abandon the practice
of recording race when we have barely begun to understand the
architecture of the human genome.
Mr. Wade goes on to point out that
although the same genes are usually implicated in the same diseases
worldwide, there are still important racial differences: Inheriting
two APOE4 genes, one from each parent, raises the risk of Alzheimers
33 times in Japanese populations, 15 times in Caucasians and only
6 times in Africans. This suggests that some unknown factor modifies
the effect of the APOE4 gene in different races . . . .
[Nicholas Wade, 2 Scholarly Articles Diverge on Role of Race in
Medicine, New York Times, March 20, 2003.]
The notion that race is not based
in biology has made significant inroads in popular thinking but
appears to be in serious retreat among specialists.
A new study by biologists at Wayne
State University in Detroit has concluded that humans and chimpanzees
are so closely related genetically that chimps should be included
in the Homo genus, along with humans. A genus is the first-level
grouping of closely-related species. The genus Canis, for example,
includes dogs, foxes, wolves, coyotes, jackals, etc., and Equidae
includes nine species of horses, donkeys and zebras. We are currently
the only member of genus Homo, although we have a number of extinct
relatives such as Homo erectus and Homo neanderthalensis.
Long lost cousin clinging
branch of the evolutionary tree?
The authors of the Wayne State Study,
which has just appeared in Proceedings of the National Academy
of Sciences, argue that although traditional zoologists decided
chimps were more closely related to gorillas than to humans, DNA
studies show otherwise: We are the chimps closest relative,
having diverged from a common ancestor five or six million years
ago. The authors point out that many species that diverged longer
ago than that are included in the same genus, and they say it
makes no biological sense to give humans special treatment with
a genus all their own. DNA analysis gives varying figures for
the extent of genetic similarity between chimps and humans depending
on which part of the genome is studied, but the authors have found
that for long stretches of important, functional DNA there is
99.4 percent similarity. They propose that chimpanzees, now called
Pan troglodytes, be renamed Homo troglodytes and be welcomed into
the family. [John Pickrell, Chimps Belong on Human Branch of Family
Tree, Study Says, National Geographic News, May 20, 2003.]
If there is so little genetic difference
between us and chimps we belong in the same family, it is clear
that very small genetic differences can produce very significant
There have been many atrocities
in the civil war that has raged in the Democratic Republic of
Congo for the past four years. In May, fighting between rival
tribal militias in the eastern province of Ituri killed more than
300 people. According to church leaders in the area, one group
of combatants, the Lendu tribesmen, cut open the people they killed
and ate the hearts, lungs, and livers. The sight of a corpse
with a missing liver or heart is horrific, especially when you
know those parts were eaten, and that the same thing could happen
to you, says Acquitto Kisembo, of the town of Bunia, where
much of the fighting took place. Father Joseph Deneckere, a Belgian
priest who has lived in the Congo since 1970, says tribesmen also
cut off the genitals and fingers of enemies, and tie them to their
weapons as charms.
Fighters have also been eating pygmies,
600,000 of whom live in the jungles of the Congo. Soldiers of
both the government and various rebel factions think pygmies are
sub-human, and believe their flesh confers magical powers when
eaten. According to UN human rights officials, Congolese have
cooked and eaten more than a dozen pygmies this year. Sinafari
Makelo, a representative of the Mbuti pygmy tribe, wants the UN
to try the cannibals before an international court. In living
memory, we have seen cruelty, massacres, and genocide, but we
have never seen human beings hunted down as though they were game
animals, he told the UNs Indigenous Peoples
Forum. [Michael Dynes, Pygmies Beg UN for Aid to Save Them from
Congo Cannibals, Times (London), May 23, 2003.]
Warning to Us All
C.G. Tracey was one of the first
white farmers to welcome black rule in the former Rhodesia. He
had a farm in what is called the Enterprise farming district,
which includes some of the best land in Zimbabwe, and is only
about 20 miles east of the capital, Harare. He was active in the
handover of power to the Mugabe government, organizing some of
the important conferences that made it possible. In the early
days of black rule he served on a number of agricultural committees
and was held in high regard.
This spring, the number two man
on the Zimbabwe supreme court, Paddington Garwe, decided he liked
Mr. Traceys farm and sent in some thugs to kick him out.
Mr. Tracey, now in his 80s, is said to be heartbroken and
confused by his eviction from the farm that has been his
lifes work. No doubt he thought his cooperation with blacks
would save his neck, but as a former neighbor who has moved to
South Africa explains, Now he is just another white man
and they want him to go.
Before Mr. Mugabe ordered the land
grab three years ago (see cover story), there were 66 white farmers
in the Enterprise area. Now there are fewer than a dozen. The
rest have not been distributed to war veterans. Instead,
they are in the hands of cabinet ministers, generals, and other
Zanu-PF bigwigs. [Peta Thornycroft, Zimbabwe Judge Secretly Grabs
White-owned Farm, Electronic Telegraph, April 19, 2003.]
Despite the efforts of the Belgian
political establishment to ban it (see April issue), the Flemish
nationalist Vlaams Blok party scored big gains in Belgiums
national elections on May 18, receiving 19.5 percent of the voteits
highest total evera significant increase over the 15 percent
it won in 1999. The Blok favors independence for the northern
Flanders region of Belgium, and campaigned on a platform calling
for closing the border to further non-European immigration and
deporting foreign criminals and illegal aliens. Its motto is Our
Muslims in Belgium:
send them home.
Although the Blok is the largest
party in the city of Antwerp, it does not have a majority, and
other parties have banded together to form a majority and keep
it out of city government. Even the conservative Christian
Democrats refuse to work with the Blok, though their leader Stefan
De Clerck admits that this cordon sanitaire has not
checked the Bloks increasing popularity. Theyre
still growing and thats a problem, he says.
Mr. De Clerck should rethink his
position. The Christian Democrats won 21.5 percent of the national
vote in May. The combined vote totals of the Christian Democrats
and the Vlaams Blok leave them within striking distance of the
left-of-center Liberal-Socialist ruling coalition41 percent
vs. 44.5 percent. If the Blok continues to gain votes while the
Christian Democrats maintain theirs, a Blok-Christian Democrat
coalition would have a good chance of governing Belgium after
the next election.
According to Dyab Abou Jahjah, a
failed parliamentary candidate and spokesman for the Belgian Muslim
Resist movement, the Vlaams Blok is already influencing
the government. Vlaams Blok talks about security, so they
start talking about security. Vlaams Blok talks about assimilation
they speak about assimilation. Thats the power of the Vlaams
Blok, he says. It is imposing itself on the governing
parties without being in government.
Mr. Abou Jahjah, 31, who gained
Belgian citizenship through a brief marriage to a Belgian, doesnt
want Muslims to assimilate. He demands separate schools for Muslim
children, and wants Arabic to be an official language in Belgium.
Instead of trying to force Muslims to adopt to Belgian culture,
Mr. Abou Jahjah thinks the prime minister should learn Arabic.
[Raf Casert, Belgiums Arab Nationalist Touches Nerve, AP,
May 16, 2003.]
One of the stars of the Vlaams Blok
is Anke Van dermeersch, a lawyer and former Miss Belgium. She
has no use for Belgians like Mr. Abou Jahjah. On the
campaign trail on her way to a seat in the Belgian Senate, Miss
Van dermeersch told the BBC, We still are very much against
the multicultural society. We need people who emigrate here to
adapt. If they dont adapt to our systems, to our laws, to
our values, they should go back where they came from. [Stephen
Castle, Belgian Coalition Wins Polls as Far-Right Gains Ground,
Independent (London), May 19, 2003. Shirin Wheeler, Belgian Far
Right Poll Boosts Fears, BBC Online, May 20, 2003.]
to Brown (Cont.)
In 1990, whites were the majority
population in 70 of the nations 100 largest cities, making
up more than 52 percent of their total populations. By 2000, whites
were a majority in only 52 of the largest cities, and were just
44 percent of their total populations. It is mainly Hispanics
who are reducing whites to urban minorities. During the 1990s,
Hispanics living in the 100 largest cities increased by 3.8 million,
or 43 percent. In the 20 fastest-growing cities, the number of
Hispanics increased by 72 percent while the number of whites increased
by just five percent.
Hispanics are not heading only for
Sun Belt cities like Las Vegas. Chicago gained more than 200,000
Hispanics during the 1990s, reversing a decades-long population
decline that saw the city drop from second- to third-largest in
the US. Without an influx of Hispanics, Boston, Dallas and Los
Angeles all would have lost population during the 90s.
So far, Hispanics have yet to turn
their numbers into political power. While whites are now a minority
in California, they were still nearly 75 percent of the voters
in last falls statewide elections. But as their numbers
in California continue to decrease (only 36 percent of the states
public schoolchildren are white), their political power will fade.
[Whites a Minority in US Cities, BBC Online, April 30, 2003.]
As we reported last month, the British
National Party (BNP) enjoyed its greatest electoral success to
date in Britains May 1st local elections. In Burnley, scene
of anti-white rioting in 2001, the BNP added five seats to the
three it already held, making it the second-largest party on the
town councilmuch to the dismay of the Bishop of Burnley,
John Goddard, who said, It is now seen as not impossible
to vote for such a party. We have crossed a line, a line which
is against everything that is best in our culture.
On May 15, as the BNP councilors
entered the hall for their first meeting, Anti-Nazi League protestors
broke past police barricades and threw eggs and flour at them.
During a brief skirmish with mounted policemen, at least seven
peoplemost of them ANL protestorswere injured. Inside
the council chamber, the Labour members, led by Stuart Caddy,
refused to shake hands with their BNP counterparts, whom Mr. Caddy
regards as fascists and racists, whatever they say.
For their part, the BNP councilors, led by Len Starr, a former
sergeant in the British army, calmly went to work on council business.
[Nigel Bunyan, Violence as BNP Group Takes Seats on Council, Telegraph
(London), May 16, 2003.]
South Central Los Angeles has a
reputation as a violent, poverty-stricken, gang- and drug-infested,
crime-ridden horror. Its 16 square miles, which take their name
from Central Avenue, were for decades LAs main black neighborhood
but, like most of the city, it is now increasingly Hispanic. Still,
South Central is code in California for black,
and when blacks move into adjacent areas south and west of downtown
LA it is called South Central creep. South Central
was the scene of the 1965 and 1992 riots, crack-inspired gang
warfare of the 1980s and 90s, and has been the setting for
several Hollywood films about life in da hood.
On April 9, the LA City Council
voted 14-0 to rename South Central South Los Angeles.
Councilwoman Jan Perry, who sponsored the motion, says the name
change will make residents feel better about their neighborhood
and themselves. Its about empowering a community to
lift itself up and about how we can help communities regain a
sense of dignity and pride over their history and culture,
she says. Although he voted for the name change, Councilman Nate
Holden says it wont solve problems and wont improve
a bad reputation. [Gail Schiller, City Council Vote to Erase Notorious
South Central Name, AP, April 10, 2003. Calvin Sims, South Central
Los Angeles, Associated with Violence and Poverty, Will be South
Los Angeles, New York Times, April 10, 2003.]
On May 3, Nicole Bilbo, a twenty-year-old
white woman, broke up with her black boyfriend of two years, Kevin
Townsend. She gave him the bad news in Martin Luther King Park
in San Angelo, Texas, and he did not take it well. He told three
girl cousins who were nearbyCatrina Miller, 30, Nina Miller,
21, and Joann Miller, 18to beat up Miss Bilbo. With a shout
of, Were going to whoop this white bitch, the
Miller sisters pounded Miss Bilbo with their shoes, and Joann
Miller broke a beer bottle and cut her with the jagged edge. On
May 9, police arrested the sisters on aggravated assault and hate
crime charges. At last report, Mr. Townsend had not been charged.
[Erin Quinn, Arrests Made in Hate Crime Assault, San Angelo (Texas)
Standard Times, May 11, 2003.]
Not for long.
Since 1942, the Richmond-area Boy
Scout council has called itself the Robert E. Lee Council, but
in May, the executive board voted overwhelmingly to
change the name, effective June 2004. It is now soliciting suggestions
for a new name. Robert Tuggle, an executive board member, says
there was no outside pressure. He claims the board is simply trying
to be more inclusivepresumably by excluding a Confederate.
King Salim Khalfani, director of the Virginia chapter of the NAACP,
cheers the councils decision. He says a name-change will
encourage more non-whites to join the Scouts. [Patrick Badgley,
Richmond Boy Scouts Drop General Lees Name, Washington Times
(National Weekly Edition), May 19-25, 2003, p. 17.]
This year, for the first time, America
Online (AOL) had a net loss of subscribers. Of AOLs 27 million
US members, approximately 14 percent (4 million) are black. Since
AOL expects the number of black Internet users to increase 8.4
percent from 2003-2007double the rate for whitesit
wants to reverse its slide by designing content aimed at blacks.
AOL Black Focus offers news, beauty and style tips, hearthrob
chatrooms, and entertainment from a black perspective.
AOL members can access Black Focus by typing in AOL keyword black
Unfortunately for AOL, there are
already several Internet services geared toward blacks, for example
BET.com and BlackPlanet.com. Scott Mills, chief operating officer
of BET.com thinks AOL cannot offer black content to
rivel BET. [Paul Davidson, AOL to Launch Area for African-Americans,
USA Today, May 28, 2003.]
California, New York, Texas and
Utah all let children of illegal immigrants pay in-state tuition
at public colleges and universities. On July 1, Washington will
join the club, with Oregon likely to follow soon. Washingtons
new law applies to children of illegals who have lived in the
state for at least three years and requires them to say they will
take steps toward citizenship. The new law will save them a lot
of money. Non-residents pay $15,267 a year to attend the University
of Washington; residents pay $4,566.
The state Senate amended the original
bill to apply only to the children of non-resident aliens here
legally, but Washington Gov. Gary Locke vetoed the amendment.
Now illegal immigrants enjoy benefits not granted to full, legal
US citizens who live in other states. Jorge Padrazo, Mexicos
Consul General in Seattle, says the Mexican government, which
lobbies states to adopt similar laws, is very encouraged
and happy with this piece of legislation. [Illegal Workers
Children Get Tuition Break, AP, May 8, 2003.]
For years, non-white agitators have
been complaining that network television is too white, and groups
like the NAACP have threatened boycotts if the networks did not
add more non-white faces. Judging from the line-up of new shows
appearing on the TV schedule this fall, the networks appear to
have gotten the message.
No fewer than 18 new programs featuring
non-white stars will debut this fall, including eight new sitcoms.
Among the new shows are an NBC comedy featuring black actress
Whoopi Goldberg, and two comedies on Fox with Hispanic actors
in lead roles. The WB network will launch Like Family,
about a troubled poor white teenager sent to live with a affluent
black suburban family.
The UPN network, which currently
airs a block of black-oriented comedies on Monday nights, will
adopt a fade to white strategy on Tuesdays, running
shows that feature more white actors as the evening wears on.
[David Bauder, TV Cranks Up Diversity Volume, AP, May 21, 2003.]
Race are Hispanics?
Three point four million Puerto
Ricans live in the United States, and 3.8 million live on the
island. Nearly 81 percent of the ones on the island tell the census
bureau they are white, while only 46 percent of the
ones in the United States say they are white. The 81 percent figure
would make Puerto Rico whiter than the United States,
where only about 73 percent of the overall population describes
itself as white. There are other examples of the bleaching effect
of geography. In Texas, 61 percent of the Hispanics from Mexico
say they are white, whereas in California only 40 percent do.
In Florida, 92 percent of Cubans say they are white, whereas in
California only 68 percent do. [Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar, For Millions
of Latinos, Race Is a Flexible Concept, Los Angeles, Times, March
Last August, a black woman named
Laguana Perry leaving the drug treatment clinic at Strong Memorial
Hospital in Rochester, New York, got into an argument with a white
security officer, Mary Russello. She drove up onto the sidewalk
in an attempt to run Miss Russello over, and knocked over a street
sign that struck the security guard in the head, injuring her
severely. Miss Perry then tried to hit Miss Russello again, and
smashed into five peopleinjuring two seriouslywho
were trying to help Miss Russello. She then fled the scene. When
police caught up with her, Miss Perry at first said her foot slipped
off the brake, but then admitted she tried to hit Miss Russello,
who deserved what she got.
Miss Perry was facing up to 25 years
in prison and copped a plea, but the plea saved her only five
years: On March 17, Monroe County Court Judge Patricia Marks sentenced
her to 20 years. I didnt kill anybody, Miss
Perry complained. It was an accident.
You were intent on causing
some harm, replied the judge. And didnt care.
said Miss Perry, who added: I feel this is all about prejudice
because of the color of my skin and because of who those people
are [at least three of her victims were white] . . . what is it,
because youre taking another black person off the street?
Thats prejudice. Straight prejudice. Miss Perry will
be eligible for parole in 2020. [Greg Livadas, Reckless Driver
Gets 20 Years, Democrat and Chronicle (Rochester), March 18, 2003.]
The authorities in Madrid, Spain,
estimate that on a typical Saturday night, as many as 700,000
people are carousing in the citys 1,000 bars and nightclubs.
The 2,000 bouncers who control access and keep the peace sometimes
must use force. Last year two people died in fights between bouncers
and patrons. The National Association of Nightclubs and Concert
Halls is now offering bouncers voluntary classes in customer service,
anger managementand civil rights. SOS Racism, a Spanish
human rights group, says many doormen are under orders to keep
blacks, North Africans, Gypsies and Latin Americans out of trendy
nightspots. The classes will include lessons on the Spanish Constitution,
and teach bouncers they cannot keep people out for ethnic reasons.
[Daniel Woolls, Classes Aim to Take the Bully Out of Spains
Club Bouncers, AP, March 23, 2003.]
Sued for Freedom
Historians in St. Louis, Missouri,
have recently uncovered records of hundreds of suits brought by
black slaves seeking freedom. The hand-written documents, which
date form 1806 to 1865, were locked away in a court house for
more than a century and were recently exhumed with the help of
a federal grant. Slaves in Missouri had three grounds to sue for
freedom: that they were free blacks who had been kidnapped, that
they had been freed by their masters but were still in bondage,
or that they had spent time in a free state and should therefore
be considered free. The third argument, once free always
free was the most common.
Like a number of other slave states,
Missouri had well-established procedures for protecting the legal
rights of slaves. It set aside taxpayer money to hire lawyers
for slaves. Top lawyers sometimes traveled hundreds of miles at
state expense to get witness statements, and some cases included
hundreds of pages of testimony and legal briefs. Slave-owning
defendants were required to put up a substantial bondas
much as $2,000which they would forfeit if they did not show
up in court or sold their slaves before trial. In order to protect
slaves from retaliation, judges sometimes took custody of plaintiffs
and housed them in jails. They were rented out as day laborers,
and could collect their wages if they won their freedom. Trials
were heard before all-white juries but of the 283 freedom
cases for which records have been found, many were victories
for the plaintiffs. Some slaves won substantial damages from their
Until this find of documents, it
was generally thought the Dred Scott case was an anomaly. Scott
claimed that because he had lived for years in free, northern
states with his army surgeon master, he should be free even if
he moved back to a slave state. Scott brought the case in 1846
and won in circuit court. His master appealed, and the US Supreme
Court finally ruled in 1857 against the once free always
free doctrine. This undercut most freedom suits, though
a few Missouri slaves continued to sue on other grounds. [Stephanie
Simon, Cries For Freedom Still Ring, Los Angeles Times, March
Like many states, Florida has adopted
a standardized high school graduation test, the Florida Comprehensive
Assessment Test or FCAT. Students started taking the test in 1998,
but this is the first year they will be denied diplomas if they
flunk. Nearly 13,000 or nine percent of seniors have, in fact,
flunked and will not graduate. Some school boards have decided
to let them walk around in a cap and gown on graduation day, but
they wont get diplomas.
Needless to say, blacks and immigrants
are the ones most likely to fail, and the word is out that the
racist test must be abolished or at least ignored.
Blacks are threatening to boycott Floridas theme parks,
stop drinking Florida orange juice, and stop playing the lottery,
if they dont get their way.
At Miami Senior High, nearly 90
percent of the student body are not native speakers of English,
and 100 out of 500 seniors failed the test. On May 8, 200 students
demonstrated outside the school, waving signs and chanting No
FCAT. Their big beef is that they had to take the test in
English. We are a Hispanic-based society, says Gerrter
Martin, who failed twice. My dreams are [over], says
Jessica Duran. I want to be a doctor and because of that
I cant do it. State Rep. Ralph Arza, who is also a
Miami High teacher, says he will introduce legislation to offer
the FCAT in other languages.
This years Florida seniors
have had at least five chances to pass the test, once as sophomores,
and twice each as juniors and seniors. If they want to, they can
retake the text every year for the rest of their lives until they
pass. [HS Graduation Crisis in Florida, CBS.com, May 20, 2003.
Students: English-Only Test Unfair, WorldNetDaily.com, May 9,
The Los Angeles Unified School District
has a system of charter schools, under which a school
can petition the district for the right to set its own curriculum
and run its own finances. The system was set up mainly as a last
resort to try to save the worst schools that are overwhelmingly
black or Hispanic.
Now, the whole district is more
than 90 percent non-white, and many of the few schools with more
than a token number of whites have decided to play the charter
game and go their own way, too. Granada Hills (43 percent white),
Palisades (43.7 percent white), and El Camino Real (50.6 percent
white) high schools all want to kick over the traces, but LA Superintendent
Roy Romer is having none of it. At a recent public meeting to
consider charter petitions, Mr. Romer explained why he didnt
want them to break away: Let me tell you, they represent
a large proportion of white students in the district. He
added that they are also the upper economic groups of the
district. He could have pointed out that the schools that
still have whites are the only ones with good academic programs.
[Helen Gao, Romer Warns Charter Highs Will Harm District, Los
Angeles Daily News, April 22, 2003.]
It is fine for whites to stick around
and help pay the bill when non-white students go independent and
try something new. They just better not try the same thing themselves.
One of the reasons whites do not attend Los Angeles public schools
and why campuses with whites want to leave is that the district
is full of awful schools. This spring has seen the usual spree
of race riots, with as many as 300 students battling it out in
one day at Alain Leroy Locke High School, and Washington Preparatory
High School is working its way through a succession of principals
who cannot maintain standards.
On April 11, blacks and Hispanics
at Locke High School swung pipes and bats at each other after
a lunchtime fight erupted into a riot that went on for an hour
before police restored calm. Police arrested six students on charges
ranging from weapons possession to assault on a peace officer,
but school administrators were relieved to find that no one was
killed or had to be hospitalized.
In just the previous week, on March
28, a similar riot broke out at Washington Prep, and the school
district announced it was firing the principal, James Noble. Mr.
Noble, who replaced Margueritte LaMotte because she could do nothing
to raise the schools rock-bottom test scores, had lasted
less than a year. [Solomon Moore and Jose Cardenas, Melee Erupts
at High School, Los Angeles Times, April 12, 2003.]
Acres and a Mercedes
Every tax season, a certain number
of blacks claim some kind of imaginary tax exemption as reparations
for slavery, and 2003 was no exception. This year, Robert Foster
of Richmond, Virginia helped people file for bogus refunds of
between $8,000 and $500,000 each.
The amazing thing is that these
scams sometimes work. In 2000, Mr. Foster arranged a $504,490
refund for his daughter Crystal, which the government actually
paid. She claimed she had overpaid $500,000 in capital gains taxes
on a non-existent Black Capital Investments fund at
the US Treasury. The IRS has recovered $266,000 and a Mercedes
Mr. Foster, who has been happily
helping people file false returns ever since, says his dispute
is not with the IRS but with racist white rule. [Indictment:
Father, Daughter Claimed Slavery Reparations, Richmond Times-Dispatch,
April 20, 2003.]
• BACK TO TOP • •
| L E T T E R S
F R O M R E A D E R S
SirWhile I appreciate Prof.
Steven Farrons description of my review of Steven Pinkers
The Blank Slate in the March 2003 issue of AR as perceptive,
I have to disagree with him and maintain what I said in the review,
that much of what the Progressive Era, the New Deal, and
the Great Society did or tried to do was justified in terms of
the blank slate doctrine. Prof. Farron writes that he cannot
see how any of the programs of the Progressives . . . or New Deal
. . . were motivated or justified by that concept.
But the blank slate doctrine
is essentially the idea that the minds and behavior of human beings
are not the products of nature or genetic inheritance but of the
social environment. As historian George E. Mowry wrote of the
intellectual atmosphere of the American Progressive movement in
The Era of Theodore Roosevelt and the Birth of Modern America,
1900-1912 (p. 37), Central to this new intellectual
formulation was the firm belief that to a considerable degree
man could make and remake his own world . . . . Both the rising
social sciences and the new social gospel promised that basically
men were more alike than different and that they were not evil
by inheritance, but, if anything, were inclined by their own nature
to be good. . . . the great inequalities existing among them at
the moment were not natural, and from the viewpoint of social
peace and human welfare were decidedly bad.
Historian Eric Goldman in his standard
account of Progressive Era political thought, Rendezvous with
Destiny (pp. 78-79), explains how the thought of Henry Georges
book Progress and Poverty, the most rounded and powerful
note in a growing chorus, helped popularize the idea that
an environment that had been made by human beings and could
be changed by human beings determined all men, institutions,
and ideas, and that legislating a better environment,
particularly a better economic environment, could bring about
a better world, and bring it about before unconscionable centuries.
Goldman also discusses the role and impact of Franz Boas himself
on Progressivist thought and policies about race.
Historians Arthur S. Link and Richard
L. McCormick write in their monograph, Progressivism (p.
24): Since social scientists accepted environmentalist and
interventionist assumptions implicitly, they believed that knowledge
of natural laws would make it possible to devise and apply solutions
to improve the human condition. This faith underpinned the methods
used by almost all reformers of the time: investigation of the
facts and application of social-science knowledge to their analysis;
entrusting trained experts to decide what should be done; and,
finally, mandating government to execute reform.
The New Deal ideology was not distinct
from that of the Progressive Era from which it emerged. As historian
William S. Leuchtenberg writes in Franklin D. Roosevelt and
the New Deal (p. 33), The New Dealers shared John Deweys
conviction that organized social intelligence could shape society,
and some, like [A.A.] Berle [Jr.], reflected the hope of the Social
Gospel of creating a Kingdom of God on earth.
Sociologist and historian E. Digby
Baltzell in his classic work, The Protestant Establishment,
also discussed the importance of Boas as well as of John B. Watson,
founder of behaviorist psychology, and his brother-in-law, New
Deal Interior Secretary Harold C. Ickes, who was so solicitous
of blacks that he was sometimes called the Secretary for
Negro Affairs. It is important to see, Baltzell
wrote (p. 271), that the New Deals efforts to change
the economic and cultural environment, largely through legislating
greater equality of conditions between classes of men, were a
reflection of the whole intellectual climate of opinion at the
time. In almost every area of intellectual endeavorin the
theories of crime, in law, in religion, and in the artsthere
was general agreement as to the sickness of the bourgeois society
and the need for environmental reform.
Prof. Farron describes the reforms
of the Progressive and New Deal eras as consisting of direct
election of senators, referendum and recall at the state and municipal
level and social security [and] the National Labor
Relations Act. These were certainly reforms of those eras,
but much of their theoretical rationalization as well as that
of the many other measures supported by reformers in these periods
was grounded in the environmentalism advanced not only by Boas
and Watson, but also by even earlier environmentalists such as
Charles H. Cooley, Lester Frank Ward, John Dewey, and Oliver Wendell
Holmes, Jr. As Baltzell also writes (p. 162), All were opposed
to racism, Social Darwinism, imperialism, and all forms of hereditary
determinism; and all assumed the malleability of human nature
which was capable of responding to improved social conditions,
and (quoting Dewey), there must be a change in objective
arrangements and institutions; we must work on the environment,
not merely in the hearts of men.
Samuel Francis, Arlington, Va.
• BACK TO TOP • •