needs a more immediate, practical focus.
by John Hunt Morgan
Hardy is supposed to have said that men and women generally take
different views of reform. Men, he argued, seem to think they
have to remake the entire world in order to be happy in their
little corner of it, whereas women tend to concentrate on improving
their corner, and leave the rest of the world alone.
time for the feminine approach.
In this respect, American Renaissance
is a typically masculine undertaking. It is full of articles about
the larger society, written clearly in the hope of changing society.
AR is an almost touching expression of faith in Richard Weavers
famous dictum, Ideas have consequences. It sends powerful
ideas out into the world in the hope that they will have powerful
I note that over the years readers
have written to complain that AR does a good job of explaining
what the problems are, but has little to say about how to solve
them. These people are not asking for suggestions about how to
change their little corner of the world. They are men who want
to know what they can do personally to help change the world.
I hope and believe that some day
the ideas promoted by AR and other racially aware publications
will change the world, but this will not happen soon. It will
be some time before people who think as we do are setting policy.
In the meantime, it is worth considering Hardys female approach.
As we work to promote a general understanding of race, how can
we also improve our little corners of the world?
I once met a group of Identity
Christians, who almost perfectly demonstrated Hardys view
of the sexes. One of the men told me he was working on a way to
reconcile Biblical creationism with the geological evidence for
evolution. He explained to me that he was finally approaching
a solution: Whites were created but the other races evolved from
primitive life forms.
AR is an almost
touching expression of faith in Richard Weavers
famous dictum, Ideas have consequences.
The women had other priorities.
They had set up a network for passing around baby clothes as children
outgrew them. They were also working on a pro-white coloring book
with practical instruction for children. Mixed in with Charles
Martel and President Polk, there was a page with an automatic
pistol and a message that said something like: This is Daddys
gun. If you find it, dont touch it. Tell Mommy or Daddy
right away. As one of the women explained, many people in
their circle have guns, and children need to be reminded of gun
safety. Thomas Hardy would not have been surprised: The man was
working out who was created and who evolved, while the women were
making sure the children had clothes and didnt shoot each
The women were particularly interested
in childrenand rightly so. Our children must grow up with
healthy racial views, and yet they are uniquely vulnerable to
bad influences in countless ways we are not.
Adults can live in a world full
of anti-white, anti-racist propaganda without being
affected by it, because people who have gained a sound understanding
of race are not likely to lose it. People do not give up a view
of the world that explains so much for one that leaves life full
of mysteries. Once we have taken off the blinders, we see the
racial double standards clearly, we know which part of the story
the newscasters left out, and we see how desperately every American
institution distorts the truth. The foolishness we read and hear
may infuriate us, but the propaganda is so simple-minded no one
who has seen through it will ever be duped again. And even if
our neighbors and associates are conventional liberals, we are
part of a community of publications, conferences, and Internet
Rosa Parks, official
Things are much more difficult
for children. Simple-minded propaganda works on them because they
have simple minds. At the same time, no matter how racially healthy
their homes may be, the pressure to conform to the outside world
is tremendous. Children hate to be different, and today, a child
whose mind is not poisoned is different. How do we protect children
from propaganda and from the pressures of conformity?
I can cite several examples of
the dangers. I have gently done my best to give my children healthy
racial views, but I have not always succeeded. I am from a family
of Southerners, and over the years, I have tried to interest my
10-year-old daughter in her Confederate ancestors. I have not
been very successful. The Confederacy does not get much respect
either at school or among her friends, and what I say has little
effect. However, some months ago I took her to see the movie Gods
and Generals, which is about the early years of the War Between
the States. It paints as realistic a picture as possible, and
offers a sympathetic portrait of Stonewall Jackson. His death,
after the battle of Chancellorsville, with his wife by his side,
is a very moving scene.
This single movie affected my
daughter more than anything I ever said to her. She marched out
of the theater a staunch Confederate, and remains one to this
day. The results on this occasion happen to have been good, but
this only proves the extraordinary power of film, and we all know
the insidious message that is most often on the screen.
At school, children try to please
their teachers, and what pleases them is standard anti-racism.
In grade school one year, my daughter had a choice of several
biographies on which to write a report. I was surprised to find
that one of the choices was the life of Robert E. Lee, and I encouraged
her to read about him. One day, she came home from school and
announced she had chosen her book. I thought about General
Lee, she said, but I chose Rosa Parks instead.
She later reported that the book was the most boring thing she
had ever read, but she decided to please her teacher and classmates
rather than her father. This is hardly surprising.
Any group that
is out of step with the mainstream in any fundamental
waymust be able to rear children in a way that supports
How can we give our children a
proper start in life? In the October 2001 issue of AR there is
an excellent article about rearing honorable white children. Prof.
Robert Griffin of the University of Vermont profiled a number
of families that have taken their racial responsibilities seriously,
and who have arranged their households so as to instill sound
racial and cultural values. These are inspiring stories, and the
children will no doubt benefit greatly. However, these families
all did something not all families can do: They taught their children
at home rather than send them to school.
Home schooling is, of course,
the only way to control what children learn, but not every family
can do it. Even if an adult is home all day, not all parents or
children are temperamentally suited to home schooling. Also, a
single, self-contained family is not a community. Children need
What would be ideal is a place
where the neighbors think as we do, and where the school teachers,
the mayor, and the fire chief do, too. We need a community of
racially conscious whites who buildsimply by being togetherthe
healthy atmosphere whites used to take for granted.
As a father, I am particularly
conscious of the benefits such a community would have for children,
but it would have great benefits for adults, too. How pleasant
it would be for a neighborhood get-together to feel like an American
Renaissance conference. At the last conference I attended,
someone said to me, Its great to be among the living
again. It would be wonderful to live among the living.
Not the way to do it.
The most important aspect of such
a community would be the education it offered children. Any group
that is out of step with the mainstream in any fundamental wayand,
for the time being, racially-conscious whites are radically out
of stepmust be able to rear children in a way that supports
Would it be difficult to gather
together the nucleus of such a community? Certainly it would,
but it would be easier than electing a racially healthy Congress
or state legislature. At the same time, even a small zone of healthy
white consciousness could become a base for efforts at achieving
larger changes. Sooner or later, whites will form communities
of their own, and the sooner we begin, the more successful we
Communities of like-minded people
do not spring up by accident. People have to build them, and Americans
have a long history of building them. Most such people, like the
Amish and the Shakers and Mormons, have had religious motives,
but Americans have gathered for all kinds of reasons, some of
them completely harebrained. Until recently, a black man named
Dwight York, a convicted rapist who claimed to have come from
the planet Rizq, ran the United Nuwaubian Nation of Moors at a
compound not far from Eatonton, Georgia. One hundred fifty Nuwaubians
lived at the site, practicing an odd mixture of invented and Egyptian
religion. They would still be there if it had not come to light
that Mr. York was molesting little Nuwaubian girls.
An even more extreme example was
Jim Jones and his Peoples Temple. He managed to get more than
900 people to move to Guyana and build a town in which they could
practice their religion. They built a system to train members
in their dissident views, but it began to unravel, and on Nov.
18, 1978, they all committed suicide. The point here is that even
crazy people can leave their old lives and build communities.
Sane white people should certainly be able to do considerably
Probably the best-known example
of a group that has built its own institutions to maintain a sharply
dissident way of life is the Amish. They have been very successful
in preserving a way of life completely at odds with the rest of
America, but they are not a good model for racially-conscious
whites. They have farm communities that have been established,
in some cases, for centuries. Most racially-conscious whites are
not farmers, and they need to form new communities, not carry
on the ones into which they were born.
There are now
more than enough racially aware whites to move gradually
into a small town and remake its institutions.
The Amish also have an unusual
education system. They study in private, one-room schools that
go up only to 8th grade. The Amish and Mennonites received a special
Supreme Court exemption in 1972 from state requirements for education
beyond middle school, successfully arguing that their people learn
wisdom in the household and behind the plow, and that secondary
schools are purveyors of temptation and worldliness. Racially
conscious whites have the same distrust of high schools, but most
would rather fix them than abolish them.
There are other successful dissident
communities, established much more recently, with the express
intention of building institutions to encourage a way of life
at odds with the mainstream. These are the Orthodox Jewish towns
of Monroe, Monsey, and New Square, all in New York. As a rule,
Orthodox Jews have a head start on community because they are
forbidden to drive on the Sabbath and must walk to temple services.
This means they cannot live very far away from each other.
However, in these three cases
they have gone much further, and have established all-Orthodox
towns that reflect their desire to build institutions in which
they can rear their children. If anything, Orthodox Jews are more
out of step with the rest of America than racially-conscious whites,
and they understand that without communities, without schools
for their children, their way of life will disappear.
Jews founded New Square and Monroe
as entirely new settlements. New Square got its start in 1953,
when an Orthodox congregation bought an old farm, and parceled
it out as lots. New Square now has a population approaching 10,000.
Monroe was established in the mid-1970s by a larger congregation,
and has a population of about 20,000. All the schools in both
Monroe and New Square are private.
Monsey developed differently,
and is perhaps the most promising model for racially-conscious
whites. It was an ordinary, gentile town that began to develop
as an Orthodox community after a seminary was founded there and
many graduates decided to stay. Once a Yeshiva was built for younger
students, Monsey became a center in which Orthodox Jews of all
ages had the institutions they needed. The Orthodox from the entire
area started moving in, and residents found they could sell their
houses for a hefty premium. Soon Monsey was overwhelmingly Orthodox.
There were no doubt some gentiles who were sorry to see their
community transformed within a generation, but they had the consolation
of getting out at a nice profit. This has certainly not been the
case for millions of whites displaced by blacks or Mexicans.
Not quite right either.
These three towns are now completely
stable, with more people wanting to move in than there are spaces
available. Owners will not sell to anyone who is not Orthodoxnot
even to other Jewsand though this is against the law, only
the Orthodox want to buy houses there anyway. The schools are
Orthodox, the mayor is Orthodox, and all the plumbers and painters
are Orthodox. These towns do not have police forces because the
only crimes are parking violations. Parents have the perfect set
of institutions within which to rear children, and Orthodoxy has
a guaranteed future.
The school system is the key to
a successful community. Children cannot sustain a dissident point
of view in the face of a school system that teaches liberal nonsense.
Orthodox Jews have always understood this, and because their schools
are religious they have built private schools to sustain their
way of life.
Private schools for whites are
desirable but not necessary. Setting one up is a big job, and
with enough people in a community, it would be easier and cheaper
to elect a school board, and revamp the public schools. American
schools teach the same subjects they did 50 years ago. It is the
emphasis that has shifted, and there is no reason why a racially-conscious
school could not shift the emphasis back. A curriculum taken unchanged
from 50 years ago probably would be, except for a few odds and
ends like sex education, in compliance with current standards.
If state regulations demanded teaching units on American Indians,
the slave trade, or American multiculturalism, these subjects
could certainly be taughtthough from a more traditional
point of view. In fact, it would be important to cover those subjects
thoroughly whether they were required or not. Any child who went
to college after an education of this kind might be in for a shock,
but by that age healthy ideas would probably be unassailable.
Ready for white people?
There are now more than enough
racially aware whites to move gradually into a small town and
remake its institutions. These whites would not have to be a majority
in order to elect town councilmen or school board members. An
activist minority can achieve a great deal, and any largely white
town would have a certain number of original inhabitants who would
support a return to good sense.
The question, of course, is where
whites should go. Moving is a great bother, and everyone can think
of reasons why the best place for a white community is the place
where he already lives. Some obvious criteria are that if an existing
town is to be taken over, it should be small, already overwhelmingly
white, and with its own small school district. If a school is
part of a huge, county-wide school district, for example, it could
not be returned to sanity without taking over the entire districtan
extremely difficult undertaking.
After people move, they have to
make a living. It would be important to choose a town not far
from a metropolitan area with jobs. When the Orthodox congregations
built new towns, they arranged for private commuter buses into
New York City so people could support themselves. It would be
good to attract a certain number of retired people whose pension
or Social Security income would follow them wherever they moved.
A retirement home in a white town would be attractive to older
people who prefer to be looked after by people from the community
rather than by black and Puerto Rican orderlies.
Building their community.
Some would fear that the government
would make it impossible to run a white town, but I disagree.
Sooner or later it would become clear what was happening, but
no laws require residential integration, and the country
is still largely segregated. As soon as a town had a reputation
for white consciousness, no non-whites would want to live there.
If a few insisted on moving in as test cases, they would have
to be let in; there could be no outright discrimination. However,
no one wants to spend his life as a test case. Such people would
move in with great fanfare, but would soon move out. If a certain
number of non-whites decided to stay, they would have to be tolerated.
Very few would choose that kind of life, and a handful of odd-balls
would be a small price to pay for a healthy-minded community.
The town would have to be very careful never to break anti-discrimination
laws, but practically everything necessary for a real white community
can be achieved entirely within the law.
The town would
have to be very careful never to break anti-discrimination
laws, but practically everything necessary for a real
white community can be achieved entirely within the
Some might argue that starting
small in this way is a renunciation of the larger, national goals
of a white consciousness movement. On the contrary, it could well
be that only modest beginnings can lead to greater achievements.
A successful white community would grow. It could become the nucleus
for a region that would send representatives to the state house
and to Washington. The region would not only have a political
voice, it would inspire imitators.
In the Feb. 1995 issue of AR there
was a debate about whether the United States could be saved as
a unitary, white state or whether whites would have to accept
partition if they are to gain a homeland. This was an interesting
but entirely abstract debate that does nothing to solve the problems
we face every day. White communities are compatible with either
approachpartition or unitary stateand have the immeasurable
advantage of large benefits now. Small gatherings of whites will
not immediately change the government in Washington or detoxify
the national media, but they would be the beginnings of a real,
practical movement to save our race and culture. Let us begin
to cultivate our corners of the world even as we work to change
John Hunt Morgan is a pen name.
• BACK TO TOP • •
Do We Owe Blacks?
Do blacks deserve compensation for slavery?
reviewed by Michael Levin
Justice for the
of New York Press, 2004, 158 pp., $18.95.
(and sex) quotas are now too entrenched to be noticed. It is
simply assumed that all human activity must be conspicuously
diverse; a TV newscast with only white reporters
would probably puzzle todays viewers. Justice for the
Past, by a philosopher who understands the law, is a reminder
of the purpose of quotas, and why the rationale for them is
Justice may actually attract some attention.
SUNY Press is a reputable scholarly publisher, a few of whose
books have made a splash, and this gives Justice a chance
to be widely reviewed. With luck, this book could help restart
the debate about racial preferences that has sputtered out since
the Supreme Court decided in last years Grutter
decision to keep them going for another generation (see
AR, Aug. 2003).
Many of Stephen Kershnars arguments will
be familiar to AR readers. They should look at Justice
anyway, for its less familiar arguments. These are followed
to conclusions that, by accepted standards, are too vile to
contemplate, and that even challenge some race-realist assumptions
as well. At the same time, non-philosophers should be warned
that Prof. Kershnar is a demanding writer. His free use of technical
terms, which is understandable given his intended audience,
leaves outsiders to make what they can of fine-grained
individuation, token harms in possible worlds
and referential opacity. His terse prose offers
few signposts to distinguish core material from peripheral refinements,
but perhaps this neutral tone will mean Justice is taken
more seriously than would an anti-quota rant.
Prof. Kershnar reaches four main conclusions:
superior qualifications do not create a right to a job,
compensatory justice does not demand quotas for blacks, quotas
promote no useful form of diversity, andmost
daringlywhites and Asians have greater per capita
intrinsic moral value than blacks.
As a free-marketeer on employment, Prof. Kershnar
holds that a job is anything anyone wants done,
and a qualification is the ability to do it, or
learn how. Nevertheless, job qualifications are a function
of the demands of [the employer], and employers are free
to hire whomever they wisheven badly-qualified applicants.
This may be foolish, but harms no one.
Prof. Kershnar then makes trouble for himself
by trying to distinguish between rights and deserts. A job applicant
may make himself most qualified by honing his skills, and may
therefore deserve the job. Still, Prof. Kershnar argues,
he has no right to the job because the employer can give
it to anyone he likes. This sounds contradictory. Someone who
deserves something ought to have it, that is, has a right to
it. Thats what deserves means.
Asians have greater per capita intrinsic moral value
Of course, racial liberals always insist that
a black who is no more (or perhaps a little less) qualified
than his white competitors must have tried harder to
reach a comparable level of skill, because he had to face racism,
bad role models and other obstacles. Once it is granted that
he therefore deserves the job, it pretty much follows
that he should get it. Racial liberals want it both ways,
however; if a black has not tried very hard, that too was due
to the will-sapping effects of the same racism, bad role models,
etc. Prof. Kershnar draws the line here: For him, it makes no
difference why someone didnt try hard enough. People who
do not try do not deserve those things to which effort creates
And what should be the rewards of effort? In
my view, assiduous individuals deserve no less, but no more,
than credit for their pains. Blacksand whiteswho
work to overcome environmental disadvantages should be praised
for doing so. As for why effort should be praised, the likeliest
answer is that the more people are praised for trying to do
good things the harder they will try, and the harder they try
to do good thingslike develop skillsthe more good
things will be done. Nonetheless, an E for effort is not a ticket
to a job or a place in medical school. It may be admirable for
an employee to make great efforts to succeed, but an employer
is still justified in hiring a more talented worker who does
a better job with less effort.
It seems odd at first to find merit downplayed
in an attack on civil-rights orthodoxy. Those who defend quotas
and preferences are usually the ones who deny that the best-qualified
have a right to the job. Ronald Dworkin, for instance, and the
Supreme Courts 1979 decision in Weber v. Kaiser Aluminum
makes this point in order to justify passing over qualified
whites. (This argument is rarely applied to the right of employers
to disregard qualified blacks.)
What Prof. Kershnar opposes is the basis for
anti-discrimination laws of any kind. Even many critics of quotas
endorse the 1964 Civil Rights Act, for example. Its purpose,
Prof. Kershnar notes, was to protect blacks from
supposedly losing jobs to less-qualified whites, and it assumed
that the best-qualified candidate does have a right to the job.
Critics of quotas now say that the law was (mis)read to support
reverse discrimination, but Prof. Kershnar rejects
all anti-discrimination laws on libertarian grounds. Employers
should have complete freedom to hire anyone they like.
Prof. Kershnar next considers whether quotas
are just. He narrows the question to public institutions, since
a private employers right to free association may well
outweigh whatever duty he may have to hire blacks. In the case
of public hiring, where freedom of association does not apply,
any debt owed to blacks will stand out more clearly.
Prof. Kershnars analysis is thorough.
The best-known argument for quotas, of course, is that blacks
deserve the positions they would have gotten had not wrongs
to their ancestors, chiefly slavery, impaired their abilities.
Several of Prof. Kershnars replies are also well-known:
genetic differences in intelligence, not white misdeeds, explain
a large proportion of the black/white achievement gap; genes
aside, the harm to contemporary blacks from long-ago wrongs
cannot now be determined; most white men penalized by quotas
have not performed the relevant types of culpable wrongdoing.
To these well-known arguments, Prof. Kershnar
adds several more. Even if (some) whites are beneficiaries of
past wrongs, a chance innocent beneficiary of a wrong may have
no obligation to the victim. I might offer the following example:
Even if some tourists go to Turkey rather than Israel only because
they are afraid of bus bombs, Turkey owes Israel no part of
Prof. Kershnar also stresses that todays
blacks would not exist were it not for the institution of slavery,
which brought their ancestors together. No one can reasonably
complain that he would have been betteror worseoff
had he not been born.
In considering both sides of the reparations
question, Prof. Kershnar raises a defense of reparations that
does not depend on the current generation of blacks actually
having been harmed by slavery. He takes the view that a slaves
descendants have inherited his claim to wages. The idea here
is that the slave had a right to be paid by his master for the
labor extracted from him. These unpaid wages were his property,
which, like all property, he could pass on to his heirs.
In my view, Prof. Kershnar has unearthed the
argument that leads many well-intentioned whites, in no way
disloyal to their own race, to believe that slavery still matters.
These well-intentioned whites, groping for words to express
this thought, seize on nonsense about institutional racism
or the lingering effects of long-ago events, and
dutifully profess shock when group differences in IQ are pointed
out. These whites are nonetheless getting at something real
when they deny that the book on slavery closed the day the 13th
Amendment was ratified. The inheritance model articulates what
A black slave deserved remuneration. The debt
to him incurred by his owner was not reduced by the possible
inefficiency of slaverythe fact that his owner might have
found hiring labor more profitable. The slave was owed the market
value of his work. After all, the car I just stole from you
does me no good if I wreck it, yet I owe you the replacement
value of the car just the same, not of a pile of junk. Likewise,
says Prof. Kershnar, the room and board provided by the master
did not offset his debt. He had no right to his slaves
labor even if the slave would have fared worse back in Africa.
I must restore the full value of your car to you even if, had
I not stolen it, you would have driven it off a cliff. On the
other hand, room and board intended as wages would have
lessened the masters debt.
Prof. Kershnar denies that the hereditary debt
incurred by slavery can be paid now, for many of the same reasons
slaverys ill effects cannot now be compensated (or could
be, if they were real). For one thing, the debt is impossible
to calculate at this late date. Part of the problem is added
value: if A invests the $100 he stole from B in stocks that
appreciate to $1,000, how much of the $900 profit does A owe
B? This calculation is particularly difficult with regard to
compensation for slavery, since the prevalence among blacks
of crime, out-of-wedlock births and other wasteful, destructive
behavior suggests that goods stolen from blacks would have lost
value if blacks had kept them. (Virtually everything left in
Africa by white colonists has decayed.)
A related point is that when figuring compensation
we normally require that the injured party make a good-faith
effort to minimize his losses. The fact that black unemployment
normally runs about twice that of whites, and that blacks (unlike,
for instance, Chinese) do not have a reputation for unusual
diligence in the jobs they do hold suggests blacks have not
tried especially hard to make up whatever ground they might
have lost because of slavery.
One way to calculate the debt would be to take
as a benchmark the mean difference in wealth between living
blacks and whites, but that yields an overestimate because genetic
factors explain much of the wealth difference. Finally, as we
have seen, even if a debt could be calculated, innocent white
recipients of a slaves unpaid wagespresumably the
masters heirsmay not be obliged to return these
benefits to the slaves estate.
among blacks of crime, out-of-wedlock births and
other wasteful, destructive behavior suggests that
goods stolen from blacks would have lost value if
blacks had kept them.
Prof. Kershnar cites further complications
peculiar to inheritance: claims can be sold off; descendants
may be disinherited; a slave able to dispose of wages saved
(at what interest rate?) might have given them to his church
instead of his children. Prof. Kershnar concludes for similar
reasons that no citizen today is liable for the wrongs, such
as slavery, that the states and the federal government failed
to prevent before the 20th century.
Nonetheless, Prof. Kershnar has convinced me
there is a point that must be conceded to the reparationists.
The lingering ill effects of slavery are fictions. There would
have been no more black doctors or millionaires than there actually
are if every black had come to America freelydiscounting
for quotas, there would probably have been fewer. However, the
debt owed to slaves was genuine. For practical reasons it cannot
be collected, yet at the level of principle, where critics have
rightly sought to challenge reparations, it will not go away.
The claim of blacks to have been denied their due has been wildly
exaggerated, and used to extort countless unmerited concessions
from guilty whites. It nonetheless contains an element of truth.
Prof. Kershnar then moves on to two issues
more loosely connected to justice. The first is the diversification
of opinion thatwe are assuredhigher black and Hispanic
enrollment will bring to universities. After pointing out that
less able students are unlikely to contribute much intellectually,
and that minority opinions add nothing at all to science, Prof.
Kershnar addresses the questions of whether the opinions blacks
and Hispanics are apt to express are true.
Prof. Kershnar identifies the three beliefs
of favored minorities . . . that often receive public recognition,
and which their presence will presumably promote. The first
is that justice essentially involves equality. According to
Prof. Kershnar, this article of minority faith assumes, in the
face of the wide variation found in every human trait, that
all men have the same intelligence, virtue, or whatever else
determines just treatment.
The second belief is that blacks and Hispanics
are being treated unjustly, which ignores the role of genes
in low minority achievement. The third is that the government
has a far-reaching mandate to aggressively combat this injustice,
an error with Orwellian potential if there is no injustice to
combat. Whether such ideas are actually true is soft-pedaled
when people talk of the marketplace of ideas for fear that an
emphasis on truth may somehow encourage censorship of falsehood.
Undaunted, Prof. Kershnar pronounces all three of these opinions
false. In any case, as Prof. Kershnar remarks, these beliefs
are already far more prevalent than their competitor[s]
in American higher education, and need no extra advocates.
There is one more topic in Justice For the
Past, raised in the context of compensatory justice but
not really required by it. Assume, contrary to fact, that contemporary
blacks are owed a measurable and collectible payment because
of the wrongs of the past. Since the state is supposed to enforce
debts, failure of the American government to enforce this one
would show contempt, and the notion that .
. . blacks have less moral value than other persons. However,
argues Prof. Kershnar, non-enforcement of such debts is justified
if blacks are less intrinsically morally valuable
than whites, a view he spends seventeen pages defending.
Why make an argument that is sure to be met
with outrage? Why, having already concluded that blacks are
owed nothing, pursue the doubly hypothetical and radioactive
question of whether, even if they were owed something, the government
would be justified in doing nothing because of their lower value?
I suspect Prof. Kershnar simply found the question too intriguing
to pass up.
Japanese: more valuable
It is important to understand what Prof. Kershnar
is saying. It is not, or not simply, that blacks act less morally
than whites, although the rates of black crime, illegitimacy
and venereal disease certainly indicate that they do. (Researchers
have used the prisoners dilemma, ultimatum
games and Newcomb problems to gauge a subjects
sense of justice or willingness to be cooperative, and it would
be instructive to know whether there are racial differences
in these findings. Probably some data have already been accumulated
inadvertently but not published.) Prof. Kershnars claim,
rather, can be expressed by saying that the disappearance of
whites from the universe would be a greater loss than the disappearance
of an equal number of blacks.
Logically, this view implies that if one were
forced to choose between saving an anonymous white and an anonymous
black, one should always choose the white. Prof. Kershnar says
nothing like this explicitly, but he does say his view justifies
private discrimination in favor of whites and Asians, for instance
when deciding which philanthropies to support.
Prof. Kershnar bases this eyebrow-raising thesis
on the greater autonomy of whites and Asians. Autonomywhat
people have in mind by free willis the capacity to identify
ones desires, examine them, and strengthen the more desirable
ones and suppress the less desirable.
Autonomy can be expected to correlate with
intelligence. Self-control requires insight into ones
own nature, and the capacity to foresee and compare the outcomes
of various courses of action. Whites and Asians, because they
have higher IQs than blacks, may therefore be expected to be
more autonomous, a prediction for which Prof. Kershnar cites
The question, of course, is why intrinsic value
should depend on autonomy. Just because Im more self-governing
than you, does that make me better? Prof. Kershnar relies heavily
on the observation that the belief that value tracks
autonomy best explains many everyday judgments of
value. If forced to choose between saving a man and a pig we
would all unhesitatingly save the man; forced to choose between
a pig and a radish we would save the pigpreferences which
match the man > pig > radish ordering for autonomy. Now,
this is undoubtedly the way we do think. People often act as
if they believe that more autonomy equals more value.
Saying that whites are intrinsically
better than blacks raises hackles and gives liberals an
excuse to dismiss this book. Tactically, better results can
be achieved, I suspect, merely by pointing out the values most
people embrace reflect their preference for the ways whites
do things. Making it clear that liberals prefer white ways by
their own lightsby the neighbors they choose, by the
way they want their children to grow upis a good way to
counteract liberal bromides. I dont wish to be dogmatic;
perhaps Prof. Kershnars audacity is a better way to shake
things up, but I remain skeptical of talk of intrinsic value.
Justice for the Past may raise the consciousness
of a few about quotas, but the odds of that making much practical
difference are very uncertain. After 35 years, preferences for
blacks have become the normal state of affairs, any departure
from which, especially toward race-blindness, is treated as
if it were discrimination. At the same time, a half-century
after Brown v Board of Education, decades after discrimination
in any plausible sense came to an end, black children and adolescents
still trail whites in every category at every educational level
by about as much as they did in the 1950s. Might these gaps
suggest that whites are simply more able than blacks, in which
case preferences were a bad idea from the start? By now this
obvious question is met with the pretense that the gaps are
inexplicable, or, more likely, silence.
The last opportunity to restore sanity may
have been Ronald Reagans first term, when quotas were
still considered the sort of liberal folly conservatives seriously
intended to curb. In 2004, liberals are happy to let quotas
continue to be part of the furniture, and conservatism seems
to mean bombing Arabs. So far as I can tell, quotas were never
even mentioned in the recent presidential campaign. The reception
of Justice will be revealing, which is not the same as
Michael Levin is professor of philosophy at
City University of New York.
We Owe Nothing
by Jared Taylor
are several aspects of Prof. Kershnars argument that invite
response. Although Prof. Levins review does not make this
specific distinction, it is convenient to divide claims for
reparations into two kinds: those against governments and those
against living individuals who are the presumed beneficiaries
The federal government is the favorite target
for reparations claims, not because claims against it are strong
but because it could conceivably raise the huge sums blacks
demand. However, the federal government cannot be held responsible
for slavery. There was slavery in the colonies for more than
100 years before the federal government came into existence.
Under the Constitution by which the United States was established,
slavery was regulated by the states, and was a question over
which neither Congress nor the Supreme Court had jurisdiction.
Slavery was abolished in the United States by Constitutional
amendment, which only underscores the inability of the federal
government to end it on its own authority.
Some people believe the Emancipation Proclamation
proves the President had the power to abolish slavery, but they
are mistaken. The proclamation was a war-time, executive order
that applied only to those territories still under the control
of the Confederacy, and in that sense no longer under the Constitution.
President Lincolns proclamation did not free the
slaves of Maryland or Washington, DCboth still within
the Unionbecause the President did not have Constitutional
authority to free them.
Slavery, therefore, was a practice that pre-dated
the federal government, and over which it had no control. It
makes no sense to blame it for slavery or hold it liable for
Private, not government
The claim against state governments is slightly
stronger, but fails for similar reasons. State governments did
not practice slavery. They permitted it, and passed laws to
regulate it, but it was individuals who owned slaves, not governments.
If there are claims to be made, they must be brought against
the people who owned slaves and built institutions to support
slavery; not against inanimate institutions. In any case, not
even the most ardent reparationists are bringing claims against
state governments because no one thinks they could pay or would
pay, even if they could.
What about civil suits by the descendants of
slaves directly against the descendants of slave-owners? It
would be easy to find parties to such suits, and the standard
of proof is low: preponderance of the evidence rather
than beyond a reasonable doubt. Why have no such
suits been filed? Because they would be laughed out of court.
There is no legal theory of hereditary guilt. Guilt is an individual,
not a family matter, and does not continue from father to son.
Murder is worse than slavery, and yet a murder victims
son has no claim of any kind on the son of a man who killed
Prof. Kershnar argues that slaves had a right
to wages and therefore their descendants have a claim to these
wages. Prof. Levin agrees: For practical reasons
we are not going to pay, but he concedes the principle of indebtedness.
This is a dangerous and unjustified concession. If the United
States ever accepted the principle of indebtedness to
blacks, it would be only a matter of time before someone worked
out a formula for paymenteven token payment. It is not
logical to agree that we owe a debt but then refuse to pay anything
because we dont know the exact amount. If liability
is ever firmly established, some reasonable minimum figure will
not be far behind
There are excellent reasons to reject the principle
of indebtedness. First, slavery was legal. Under 19th century
law, owners owed their slaves nothing. To insist, after the
fact, that they or their descendants should be compelled to
pay wages is to create an ex post facto crime. This is
forbidden by the Constitution, as well as by general moral principles.
The rule of law collapses if, by a change in the law, we can
turn heretofore law-abiding citizens into felons and punish
Some may be tempted to make a special exception
for slavery, but once we start applying todays moral standards
to the past, there is no end of possible exceptions. We now
consider child labor barbarous, but it was legal, just like
slavery. Governments sanctioned it, parents permitted it, and
employers benefited from it. Do the descendants of child laborers
have a claim on anyone? No.
Historically, American governments have meted
out harsh punishmentseven deathfor acts that are
now legal: fornication, homosexuality, abortion. Do the descendants
of the people so punished have a claim on the governments or
people who punished them? No.
Until the 19th Amendment was ratified in 1920,
women could not vote in federal elections, and most people think
that was wrong. Do women, collectively, have a claim on the
government or anyone else? No.
But let us stand on our heads and concede that
slavery, though perfectly legal, was a crime anyway. Prof. Kershnar
tells us the specific crime was the refusal to pay wageslet
us call it robbery or grand larceny. Most crimes short of rape,
murder, and arson have a statute of limitations, and in American
jurisdictions the statute of limitations for grand larceny is
generally five or six years. Over time, evidence goes stale,
memories decay, and justice becomes uncertain. Another justification
for the statute is that after a certain period of lawful behavior
even the perpetrators of all but the most grievous crimes deserve
to live without fear of prosecution. If the perpetrators deserve
this, do not their distant descendants deserve it even more?
For punishment to be just, it must fall on the guilty, not on
The entire question of reparations for slavery
arises only because it is part of the vexed history of American
race relations, not because of the injustice it represents.
Americans are conditioned to think slavery was a uniquely evil,
shameful part of our history. It takes on this dark hue only
because it was whites who enslaved blacks. If American slavery
had not been a racial caste systembut was otherwise exactly
as we find itit would be an unremarkable historical curiosity,
just as it is in Turkey or India or Indonesia or, for that matter,
in France, Italy, and in practically every corner of the world,
where slavery has been a near-universal phenomenon.
The fabled wickedness of American slavery has
to do almost entirely with our post-slavery racial history,
and practically nothing to do with what actually happened. It
is only because peoples minds are unhinged by the alleged
enormity of American slavery that they advance wild proposals
to suspend the Constitutions prohibition against ex
post facto crimes, or invent exotic theories about hereditary
guilt that menace us five generations after the fact.
There is slavery in the United States today.
The US Justice Department estimates that 14,500 people are trafficked
into the country every year, some held by force, others by psychological
pressure or threats to their families. They work as domestic
servants, prostitutes, and sweatshop laborers. They may be beaten,
separated from their families, and, if anything, treated worse
than Southerners treated their human property. When these cases
come to light, the guilty are punished and the victims are freed.
Even after years of forced labor, no one calculates the back
wages that were due and makes the guilty pay. No one even
thinks about requiring the taxpayer to pay a bill for back wages.
Why is there more institutional outrage over
antebellum slavery than contemporary slavery? Because white
people cannot be blamed for the modern kind. Todays slaves
are almost all foreigners, imported and exploited by foreigners.
The most common origins of both traffickers and victims are
China, Mexico, and Vietnam, and cases are most frequent among
the large immigrant populations of California, Florida, Texas,
and New York.
Let us imagine an equivalent number of exactly
the same crimes, but committed only by whites against blacks.
There would be massive public education campaigns, and a national
eradication crusade. There might even be novel theories of compensation
that required family members of white perpetrators to help pay
back wages. In the United States, merely changing
the races of the actors can turn a minor episode into a national
Black activists love to fantasize about large
checks dropping out of the sky. Although Americans have a remarkable
capacity to submit to unreasonable racial demands, those checks
will never fall from the sky. Prof. Levin believes Prof. Kershnar
has brought to light a genuine, irrefutable claim blacks have
against the rest of us, but even most liberals would probably
Only one in five households in the Old South
could even afford to keep slaves. Given the large number of
immigrants to this country since emancipation, it means only
a small minority of living Americans even have slave-owning
ancestors. Most whitesconservative or liberalwill
never accept punishment (and payment is punishment) for something
they did not do.
• • • BACK TO TOP • •
once again seek forgiveness.
by Howard Fezzell
September 29, 1767, Kunta Kinte, the invented hero in Alex
Haleys book Roots, supposedly landed as a slave
at City Dock in Annapolis, Maryland. The London-based Lifeline
Expedition and the Kunta Kinte-Alex Haley Foundation chose
Sept. 29, 2004 to hold a slavery walk from City
Dock through part of old Annapolis. Its purpose was to promote
reconciliation in the context of the Trans-Atlantic
slave trade and its legacy.
and yoked, wearing T-shirts that say So sorry.
According to publicity materials
for the walk, since 2000, Lifeline volunteers have
been walking through England, France, Spain, and Portugal
to encourage awareness of the impact and legacy of the slave
trade. This year it is Americas turn, and Holland
and the Caribbean are scheduled for 2005. In 2006, Lifeline
Expedition will go to West Africa, where its volunteers
will no doubt meet people who wish their ancestors had been
put on ships to America.
I attended the event in
Annapolis, which attracted a crowd of about 125 to 150 people,
including event staff. It opened with a prayer from a black
minister and remarks from a local politician who, in the
name of diversity, was white. A man who claimed to be a
descendent of Kunta Kinte also shared his thoughts.
It was now time for whites
to show repentance and seek the forgiveness of blacks. They
wore black T-shirts reading So Sorry, and there
were armbands reading PENITENT for whites in
the audience who wanted them. For blacks there were armbands
reading FORGIVER. I did without an armband.
When Lifelines project
leader addressed the crowd, it was not enough simply to
confess how awful slavery was. He got on his knees and said
a prayer of repentance. The white participantsthey
were called Lifeline Walkersthen confessed their repentance.
They were not on a podium and did not kneel. With people
standing around them, it would have made a difficult shot
for news cameras.
Then out came the props
for the slavery walk. The ritual requires that whites walk
in bondage with black masters. Thus there were
chains for two young white ladies, and chains plus a crude
yoke for two white gentlemen. The yoke bound the men together
at the neck, and looked impressive on television. With the
four slaves properly adorned, the walk went
from City Dock, past the historic Middleton Tavern (where
slave purchases were allegedly celebrated with frothy mugs
of ale) onto Prince Georges Street, and up to the
William Paca House, home of an 18th century colonial governor.
In a touching ceremony, the black forgivers
unshackled the white slaves, and the races were
Then, as one, blacks and
whites marched to the statue of Justice Thurgood Marshall
a few yards west of the Maryland State House. During this
final leg of the walk, a reporter for a local news channel
set up his closing scene, with marchers in the background,
while he intoned something like, Today Annapolis seeks
to become the first city of healing in America.
Closing ceremonies, in the
shadow of a twelve-foot-high Thurgood Marshall, included
several speeches, the usual prayer from a black minister,
and, to top things off, handshakes and hugs between the
man who claimed to be a descendant of Kunta Kinte and a
man who claimed to be a descendant of Kunta Kintes
owner. Then it was off to the Banneker-Douglas museum for
refreshments. I had fried chicken.
Can whites in
armbands be trusted?
Lifeline prepared a 20-page
booklet for those who could not personally share this experience
of reconciliation. It proposes the Four Healing Steps
of confession, repentance, reconciliation and, of course,
Confession requires that
one acknowledge hurtful actions and injustices,
and racial healing requires telling our history truthfully.
Truth sounds good in theory, but at many universities could
get a professor fired. Lifeline itself is not very truthful,
claiming that the blacks who sold other blacks to whites
did so reluctantly, for fear of annihilation.
They also claim that the wealth of Europe and the
Americas was built upon over 300 years of unpaid forced
labor. Alex Haley was not exactly a paragon of truthfulness
either (see sidebar).
whites must show regret for having done something
wrong. In particular, they should recognize that the
poverty of Africa compared with Europe and the United States
is a negative inheritance that needs dealing with.
requires whites to seek and receive forgiveness,
which means they are to act in ways big and small
to understand and redress the injury of racism in our society.
For restitution, Lifeline suggests giving money
to black causes, joining a Reconciliation Study Circle,
buying from blacks, and generally being an anti-racist
I am truly sorry about slavery,
but not for the reasons expressed by the organizers of this
event. The chains and yokes worn by the Lifeline Walkers
were props. The social pathologies of blacks are not. They
are real, often deadly, and the costs borne by whites in
human suffering and higher taxes are modern forms of bondage.
It is whites who need to be set free.
Haley (19211992) was a black writer who made
a great deal of money from his 1976 book Roots
and the television mini-series that followed a year
later. The book purported to be the true story of
Haleys slave ancestors. He followed a family
oral tradition all the way back to Africa, where he
met a tribal wise man whose oral tradition matched
Haleys: Slave traders snatched distant ancestor
Kunta Kinte and hauled him off to America. Roots
goes on for 700 pages and six generations of black
resistance to white oppression.
The book won a Pulitzer Prize and
a National Book Award, and was issued as a Readers
Digest condensed book. It was published in 37 languages
and has been used in courses at approximately 500
colleges. There is even a Cliff Notes-like, Novels
for Students version for scholars in a hurry. The
book is still promoted as a true story.
In fact, early parts of the book
are worse than invention; they are lifted straight
out of a 1967 novel called The African by a
white author, Harold Courlander. Courlander
sued Haley for plagiarism in 1978, forced him to admit
he had copied long passages, and collected $650,000
in damages. This, however, has done almost nothing
to tarnish Haleys reputation. By the time of
the suit, Roots was already a cultural icon
and a source of pride for blacks. Judge Robert Ward,
who presided over the plagiarism case, urged Courlander
to keep quiet since the truth would be too great a
blow to black pride.
The co-sponsor of the Annapolis slavery
walk was none other than the Kunta Kinte-Alex
Haley Foundation, whose purpose is to encourage
greater study and awareness of African-American culture,
history, archeology, and genealogy. Let us hope
they do not encourage Haleys methods.
Howard Fezell is a Maryland lawyer, and
editor of www.SecondAmendment. net.
• • •
BACK TO TOP • •
O Tempora, O Mores!
Two nationalist German parties
won seats in eastern German state assemblies in elections on September
19. The National Democratic Party (NPD) received nine percent
of the vote in Saxony and twelve seats, the first time it has
won seats in any election since 1968, when it had brief representation
in seven state parliaments. The German Peoples Union (DVU)
won six percent of the vote and six seats in Brandenburg. The
parties had agreed not to run against each other in the same states.
The NPD also did surprisingly well in the western German Saar
region in Sept. 2 elections, picking up four percent of the vote,
which was just under the five percent necessary to win seats in
the assembly. [German Far Right Makes Poll Gains, BBC News, Sept.
law and order.
Both parties want to curb immigration
and deport foreigners who are already in Germany. The NPD calls
its political philosophy social-revolutionary nationalism,
and its officials emphasize the bio-cultural roots
of the German nation. Admitting Turkey into the European Union
threatens the continent of white nations with disintegration
and decomposition. An NPD campaign poster with the caption
Have a good trip home! showed Turks carrying bags
and walking towards a minaret.
The NPD stands for Germany
for the Germans, says party leader Udo Voigt. We have
a situation now where we have six million foreigners in Germany.
We do not need them. By 2030, the majority of people living in
Germany will be foreigners. I do not want a doner kebab
(a popular type of fast food introduced by Turkish immigrants)
stand on every corner. It will end our German culture.
Mr. Voight is also critical of
American influence and excessive globalization. We want
to be sovereign, not under America, he explains. We
want our national sovereignty back. There is too much in the hands
of the Americans and too much of our economy is being taken over
by foreigners. German companies should invest in Germany, not
The party has other plans. It
wants to overthrow Germanys liberal-capitalist system,
and Holger Apfel, one of the partys Saxony candidates, wants
to restore Germanys 1945 borders, which would mean taking
land back from Poland and Russia. Nothing and nobody will
keep us from our struggle for the Reich, he proclaims. The
party is also very anti-Jewish, describing the Torah as the
original document of Jewish national hatred.
Last year, the German government
tried to ban the NPD on the grounds that it was responsible for
attacks on Jews and foreigners. However, the court threw out the
case when it found that some of the partys most extreme
members were paid police informers.
NPD supporters: For
peace and free people!
Against wars of globalization.
The DVU is run by Gerhard Frey,
who publishes an anti-immigration newspaper called the National-Zeitung.
The partys posters demanded German jobs for Germans
first and the expulsion of criminal foreigners. The party
was founded in 1987 and won 12.9 percent of the vote in the eastern
German state of Saxony Anhalt in 1998. [Allan Hall, Quest To Ban
Neo-Nazis Ends In Farce, Scotsman.com News, March 19, 2003. Far-Right
Expected to Make German Election Gains, Expatica.com, Sept. 7,
2004. German Reform Anger Triggers Far Left, Right Surge, Expatica.com,
Sept. 20, 2004. German Far-Right Parties To Form Election Alliance,
Expatica. com, Sept. 23, 2004.]
The elections were also good for
the Democratic Socialists, successors to the East German Communist
Party. They received 28.5 percent of the vote in Brandenburg and
23 percent of the vote in Saxony. The two mainstream parties of
the left and right, the Social Democrats and the Christian Democratic
Union, lost support in both states. In fact, the Social Democrats,
Germanys ruling party, won only 9.5 percent of the vote
in Saxony, scarcely more than the NPD.
The political establishment is
furious. Before the election, Saxonys premier said if the
NPD made it into parliament, he wouldnt bother going to
the United States anymore to promote his state. Party leaders
walked off the set of a roundtable discussion of the elections,
to which the NPDs Mr. Apfel was also invited, because they
could not stomach his presence.
Chancellor Gerhard Schroeders
leftist Social Democratic Party fears the success of the NPD will
scare off foreign investors. Martin Gillo, minister for labor
and economic development, puts it this way: People overseas
will ask, Whats going on in Saxony? What is a right-wing
party that was on trial and at risk of being banned doing in the
Others say the NPD has profited
from the frustration many Germans feel towards Schroeders
government and his failed economic reforms in the east, where
unemployment hovers around 20 percent. Its a mixture
of social rage, and the abuse of this rage by extreme right-wing,
neo-Nazi groups, says Hajo Funke, a political science professor
at the Free University of Berlin. They present themselves
as ordinary people, but they have this right-wing, anti-foreign,
anti-Semitic language. [Judy Dempsey, German Nationalists
Count on Resentment, International Herald Tribune (Paris), Sept.
17, 2004. Mark Landler, Rightists Make Strong Strides in Eastern
German State Elections, New York Times, Sept. 20, 2004.]
Some ordinary Germans are unhappy,
too. Hundreds of demonstrators clashed with police as they protested
the results in the Saxon capital, Dresden. [Kate Connolly, Far
Right Surges as Schröder Feels Fury of the East, Telegraph
(London), Sept. 20, 2004. Gains By Extremist Parties Trouble Germany,
Deutsche Welle (www.dw-world.de), Sept. 20, 2004.]
Place in the Sun
According to a recent Census Bureau
report, more than 292,000 blacks moved to Florida between January
2000 and July 2003. With 2.8 million, Florida now ranks second
behind New York (3.6 million) as the state with the most black
residents. In 2000, Florida ranked fourth, behind California and
Many of the states new black
residents are recent immigrants from the Caribbean or their children,
but others are part of a larger trend of blacks returning to the
South after decades of out-migration.
Broward County, just north of
Miami, attracted more blacks than any other US county from 2000
to 2003nearly 70,000, bringing the total number of black
residents to 434,985 as of July 2003. [Census: Florida No. 2 in
Black Population, AP, Oct. 1, 2004.]
In 1996, the bones of a 9,300-year-old
skeleton were discovered near Kennewick, Washington. Scientists
were intrigued by the skeletons Caucasian features and were
eager to study it, but local Indian tribes claimed Kennewick
Man belonged to them under the Native American Graves Protection
and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), and insisted he be buried without
any scientific analysis. After years of legal wrangling, the Ninth
US Circuit Court of Appeals finally ruled this summer that since
no direct link existed between the local Indians and
Kennewick Man, scientists could study the remains.
Retiring Senator Ben Nighthorse
Campbell (R-CO), a member of the Northern Cheyenne Indian tribe
and chairman of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, wants to
reverse that ruling. He introduced an amendment to NAGPRA that
would no longer require Indians to prove a direct link between
themselves and ancient remains in order to take custody. They
would have rights to any finds on land they claimed was ancestral.
Alan Schneider, an attorney for the scientists who sued to get
access to Kennewick Man, calls Sen. Campbells amendment
a real sneaky way to amend the graves law. Basically
all ancient skeletons would be subject to NAGPRA, and under the
tribes interpretation, you couldnt study them,
The Indian Affairs Committee passed
the amendment in late September, but the full Senate has yet to
act. [Matthew Daily, Scientists Protest Senate Measure, AP, Oct.
Russian security officers investigating
the September massacre at the school in Beslan where more than
300 peoplehalf of them childrenwere killed have detained
a British citizen who they suspect is one of the terrorists.
Kamel Rabat Bouralha, a 46-year-old father of three, was apprehended
trying to escape from Russia into Azerbaijan to seek medical treatment.
Mr. Bouralha and two other men suspected of participating in the
Beslan massacre, both Algerians, studied together at the Finsbury
Park mosque in north London, a well-known breeding ground for
Islamic terrorists. Muslims recruited at Finsbury Park have been
captured fighting US forces in Afghanistan. [Jason Burke, London
Mosque Link to Beslan, The Observer (London), Oct. 3, 2004.]
Last March, American soldiers
captured a senior al-Qaida operative in Afghanistan who was carrying
plans to poison US military field rationscalled Meals, Ready
to Eat (MRE)as they were being prepared at American plants.
When federal agents raided the Wornick Co. facility that produces
MREs in McAllen, Texas, they found no evidence of poisoning but
did discover hundreds of illegal workers. The illegals, mostly
from Mexico and Central America but also from the Middle East,
had been supplied to Wornick by a San Antonio-based temporary
agency, Remedy Intelligent Staffing. In an indictment unsealed
on Sept. 30, government prosecutors say Remedy gave the illegal
aliens false work papers, and also sent fraudulent employment
forms to the Joint Terrorist Task Force. The company denies any
Still ready to eat.
The war on terrorism has led to
other crackdowns on companies that hire illegals. The day before
the indictment against Remedy, federal agents raided the Brownsville,
Texas, shipyard of defense contractor AMFELS, and netted 41 illegal
aliens working for subcontractors. A secure industrial infrastructure
is absolutely essential to the defense of the United States of
America, says US Attorney Mike Shelby. I intend to
use every law the federal government gives me to ensure that nothing
we do here at home compromises a single troop or a single sailor
who risks their life abroad. [James Pinkerton, Company Indicted
in Worker Inquiry, Houston Chronicle, Sept. 30, 2004.]
Each time Sabrina Varroni walks
the streets of her hometown of Drezzo in northern Italy, she risks
a $50 fine. A convert to Islam married to a Morrocan, she refuses
to obey a 1931 law that prohibits masks or clothing that conceal
identity, and insists on wearing a burka that covers her face
and body. She has been cited twice but refuses to pay the fine,
claiming the law violates her religion. She also plans to sue.
The mayor of Drezzo, Cristian Toletinni, says enforcing the law
ensures public safety in an age of terrorism, but leftist critics
say enforcement is racist.
Matteo Salvini, a Northern League
member of the European Parliament, hopes Milan, Italys second
largest, will start enforcing the law. He says so many Muslims
in Milan wear burkas and other distinctive clothing that parts
of the city are beginning to look like Kabul. If
I go to a mosque, he adds, I take off my shoes because
I respect their laws. Im asking them, with other traditions,
to respect our laws. Its that simple. The problem is, they
dont want to mix with Italians. They want to stay apart.
Given the number of suspected terrorists operating it Italy, Mr.
Salvini says it would be foolish to let people move about in public
in disguise. [Tracy Wilkinson, In Italy, a Clash on
Burka Ban, Los Angeles Times, Sept. 26, 2004.]
Each year, more than 200,000 people
tour the Slave House on Goree Island, Senegal, where millions
of Africans supposedly passed through the door of no return
onto slave ships. After walking through the door,
says tour guide Aladji Ndiaye, it was bye-bye Africa. Many
would try to escape. Those who did died. It was better to give
ourselves to the sharks than be slaves. Slave House guides
tell of the suffering of 20 million slaves who languished in holding
cells. Many visitors leave in tears.
The door of no
The Goree Island Slave House,
declared a World Heritage site by the United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in 1978, has attracted
such luminaries as Pope John Paul II and President George W. Bush.
In 1998, President William Clinton gave a speech on the island
in which he all but apologized to Africa for Americas role
in slavery. American blacks make pilgrimages to Goree Island in
search of their roots.
There is just one problem with
the Goree Island Slave House: The whole story is phony,
says Philip D. Curtain, a retired history professor at Johns Hopkins
University. Goree Island was never a slave transport center; Senegalese
slaves left from barracoons on the Senegal and Gambia rivers.
As for the Slave House, it was the beautiful home of a wealthy
merchant and would never have been used to warehouse slaves. The
door of no return through which slaves stepped onto
the decks of waiting ships is also a fraud. Prof. Curtain points
out there are so many boulders in the water by the house it would
be impossible to dock a ship.
Abdoulaye Camara, a historian
and curator of the Goree Island Historical Museum, nearbut
not affiliated withthe Slave House, says the story was invented
in the 1960s to drum up tourism, but now serves as an emotional
shrine for descendants of slaves. The slaves did not go
through that door. The door is a symbol. The history and memory
needs to have a strong symbol, he explains. You either
accept it or you dont accept it. Its difficult to
interpret a symbol.
Some Western tour books have caught
on to the hoax. Goree Islands fabricated history boils
down to an emotional manipulation by government officials and
tour companies of people who come here as part of a genuine search
for cultural roots, says Lonely Planets West African
guide book. UNESCO hasnt changed its tune. We are
certain that the House of Slaves had something to do with the
slave trade, says a spokesman. [John Murphy, Slave Portal
has Mythic Power, Baltimore Sun, Aug. 8, 2004.]
it in Swati
One of the most cherished plans
of the black government of South Africa is the rehabilitation
of native languages supposedly suppressed by whites during apartheid.
The government recognizes eleven official languagesEnglish,
Afrikaans, Xhosa, Zulu, Pedi, Tswana, Sotho, Tsonga, Swati, Venda,
and Ndebeleand under the National Language Policy Framework,
all important government documents will be translated into all
eleven. The government also promises to support more than a dozen
non-official languages. Deputy president Jacob Zuma says the new
policy will complete restoration of the pride and dignity
of all our people.
Not everyone agrees. Its
not practical, says Shelagh Blackman of AngloGold, a large
mining company. I dont think South Africa can afford
that many languages. I understand the spirit, but you cant
have eleven official languages. Its enriching to have more
than one, but coping with too many is a problem. AngloGold
and other companies believe English should be the lingua franca.
Its the language of business, technology, commerce,
Miss Blackman explains. In South Africa, its the language
Miners and white foremen have
long communicated in fanagalo a simple pidgin mix
of Zulu, Xhosa, and other languages, but English is rapidly replacing
it. Instructions for operating modern mining equipment are in
English, and fanagalo cannot express complicated ideas. How
do you teach a person in fanagalo to operate a personal computer?
asks AngloGold training officer Benade Baird.
Many blacks want the government
to promote English. With English I can enter any office
and solve any problem, says mineworker Daniel Methula, a
native Swati speaker. I feel proud because I can speak for myself
and I dont need someone to speak for me. English is the
best language because English can unite us. [Laurie Goering,
S. Africa Asks Diversity, but English Rules, Chicago Tribune,
Aug. 3, 2004, p. 7.]
Residents and businesses across
the country are complaining about illegal immigrant Hispanic day
laborers who congregate in public places to look for work. The
problem is worst in California. In San Bernadino, day laborers
outside a Home Depot drink, deal drugs, urinate in public, and
make sexually suggestive comments to women. They stop cars and
mob the drivers asking for work, which blocks traffic and annoys
the drivers. In the San Gabriel Valley as well, Hispanic day laborers
gather on corners and in parking lots, leave trash, and harass
women. They give the area a bad image and lower property values.
Residents have the same complaints in Concord. My wife doesnt
feel safe going to work, says one man. The high concentration
of day laborers seems to make the neighborhood less attractive
to prospective buyers and businesses.
Towns have tried several solutions.
Many have passed anti-solicitation and public order legislation
so that police can fine the laborers. In San Bernadino, for example,
police recently handed out tickets of up to $340 for blocking
the sidewalk and threatened fines of up to $2,000 for soliciting.
Such laws are on shaky legal ground, however. In 2000, a Los Angeles
judge struck down a local law barring day laborers from soliciting
work on streets on the grounds that it violated their rights to
freedom of speech and association. The Mexican American Legal
Defense Fund calls the laws racist, and threatens to challenge
them. A San Bernadino city councilman also calls the penalties
for the laborers racist and urges greater understanding of their
plight: What are we, Nazi City? These people are trying
to make a living. Were going to pound them because theyre
trying to get a job.
Some cities have built day-labor
centers where no one asks for papers, but no one likes them. Residents
complain of drinking and public urination. The men often avoid
the centers because they are poorly run and corrupt. Often, managers
give jobs only to friends or take bribes to move a mans
name to the top of the hiring list. Also, the centers can usually
find jobs for only a fraction of the people who want work. [Karin
Ruben, Workers Unwanted, San Gabriel Valley Tribune, March 20,
2004. Tyche Hendricks, More Workers than Work, San Francisco Chronicle,
July 14, 2004. Stephen Wall, Day Laborers Ask Nonprofit for Help
Against Recent Sidewalk Citations, San Bernadino County Sun, Sept.
Residents sometimes ask Immigration
and Customs Enforcement to investigate the men, but the agency
says it does not have enough jail space or money to do anything.
Many Border Patrol officers would like to crack down on day laborers,
but their supervisors forbid it. This policy was the result of
a scandal over the Border Patrols inland sweeps for aliens
(roundups far from the border) in June. In two weeks, a newly-formed
mobile unit based at the Temecula, California, station caught
500 illegal aliens in inland cities. Immigrant advocates immediately
demanded that the sweeps stop, and Asa Hutchinson, undersecretary
for border security at the Department of Homeland Security, complied.
The total number of apprehensions by Temecula agents fell from
711 in June to 349 in July. One agent says, If we are driving
by a day-laborer hiring spot, we cant stop to check anyone
for documents. Those orders come from current station management.
[William Finn Bennett, Staffing Shortage Hits Border Patrol, North
County Times (Escondido), Sept. 7, 2004. Cathy Cobbs, Residents:
Workers, Move On, Dunwoody Crier (Cal.), Aug. 31, 2004.]
James Hart, the Republican congressional
candidate for Tennessees 8th district in the north west
of the state, is an unapologetic believer in eugenics and the
inequality of the races. He believes whites and Asians are the
favored races, and blacks the less favored races.
If the favored had integrated with the less favored centuries
ago, he says, there would never have been automobiles, electric
lights, or airplanes. Unless the less favored stop outbreeding
the favored, America will end up like Detroit. The way to shift
birthrates to benefit the favored races is to eliminate welfare
and immigration, and to give productive and creative people economic
incentives to have children. [Amber McDowell, Eugenics Backer
Causes Stir in Tennessee Race, AP, August 4, 2004.]
From James Harts
The district in which he is campaigning
supports Democratic incumbent John Tanner so overwhelmingly that
the Republicans did not even field a candidate. Mr. Hart needed
only 25 signatures to qualify for the Republican primary, which
he won unopposed. The Republicans realized what was happening
only after it was too late to file papers, but tried to organize
a write-in campaign. It failed, and Mr. Hart won the primary with
79 percent of the vote.
Mr. Hart always wears a bulletproof
vest and carries a gun as he campaigns door-to-door. He chooses
only well-kept neighborhoods, assuming the residents will be mostly
white. If a white answers when he knocks, he says, Im
James Hart, and Im running for Congress. I believe white
children deserve the same rights as everyone else. If a
black answers, he leaves campaign literature and moves on. He
is relieved when no one is home because he finds it unpleasant
to tell people things they do not want to hear. Nevertheless,
some voters agree with him and pledge their vote. Indeed, an alderman
in the town of Dresden named Terry Odle says, I like what
he stands for. White folks are getting the shaft here lately.
Were a minority [in the heavily black area]. Its time
to get back on track.
Mr. Hart does not expect to win
the general election. He decided to campaign mainly to publicize
his ideas, but also to do penance for the suicide of his son,
who shot himself three years ago. He blames himself and his generation
for creating a culture in which his son could find no reason to
live, and thinks he would never have shot himself in the suburban,
all-white world of Mr. Harts childhood. [Richard Locker,
GOP Group Snubs Hate Candidate, Commercial Appeal
(Memphis), July 22, 2004. Vanessa Gezari, Race, Fear Collide
In Campaign, St. Petersburg Times, Oct. 5, 2004.]
Arizonas Proposition 200
is a ballot initiative that would deny illegal aliens state welfare
benefits and require proof of Arizona citizenship to get a drivers
license or register to vote. The proposition would make it a crime
for public officials to fail to verify citizenship when providing
these services and would allow citizens to sue the government
for lax enforcement of immigration laws. The group Protect Arizona
Now (PAN) created and is campaigning for the initiative, on which
Arizonans will vote this month.
Unlike Proposition 187, a similar
California initiative passed in 1994, this initiative targets
only state benefits, but would do nothing to deny illegal aliens
federally-mandated services, such as education and emergency medical
care. Prop. 200s backers believe that limiting themselves
to state benefits will help them avoid the legal problems that
led to the invalidation of most of Proposition 187.
The measure is very popular with
voters, regularly winning 3-to-1 support in polls. However, it
is opposed by virtually the whole of Arizonas political
and business elite, including its governor, its entire Congressional
contingent, the states Chamber of Commerce, and its hospitals.
They complain Prop. 200 will do nothing to curb illegal immigration,
require a new bureaucracy to verify citizenship, and make Arizona
look anti-Hispanic.[Mike Sunnucks, Scottsdale Chamber Opposing
Prop. 200, Phoenix Business Journal, Oct. 4, 2004.]
One of PANs advisors is
Virginia Abernethy, an emeritus professor at Vanderbilt who is
on the advisory board of the Council of Conservative Citizens
and writes for nationalist publications like The Occidental
Quarterly and Middle American News. The campaigns
association with her has caused controversy. The Center for New
Community, called an anti-bigotry group in a newspaper
article, broke the news about her association with PAN in early
August. With charges of racism already swirling around [PAN],
read its report, [PAN] has taken the surprising step of
choosing a leading figure in the white supremacist movement to
chair its new national advisory board.
This was followed by a number
of newspaper editorials and press releases expressing shock and
dismay. One came from the Federation for American Immigration
Reform (FAIR), a restrictionist lobbying group that helped gather
signatures for the initiative. Their press release said Dr. Abernethys
views were repugnant, divisive, and do not represent the
views of the majority of Arizonans who support Proposition 200.
They called on both Dr. Abernethy and Kathy McKee, the director
of PAN who appointed her, to resign from the campaign. An editorial
in The Washington Times said Dr. Abernethys repulsively
un-American views were a legitimate reason to oppose the
initiative. [FAIR Press Release, What FAIR Believes . . . One
Unified American Community, Aug. 9, 2004. . . . While Arizonans
Debate Illegals, Washington Times, Sept. 25, 2004.]
Both women have responded to these
attacks with great poise. In response to the Center for New Community,
Dr. Abernethy said she was not a supremacist, but rather a separatist.
Were not saying anything about supremacy, not at all.
Were saying each ethnic group is happier with its own kind.
The group had merely resorted to name calling because it had no
valid arguments against the measure. Ms. McKee said, I think
weve all been called [racists] and its getting to
be really old.[Yvonne Wingett, Protect Arizona Now Advisor
Denies Racism Charge, Arizona Republic (Pheonix), Aug. 7, 2004.]
Dr. Abernethy further defended
herself in a letter to The Washington Times. She pointed
out that the integrationist ideal no longer governs America. Rather,
the current ethos is multiculturalism, in which each ethnic
group identifies with its own and battles for privilege and power
on the basis of ethnic identity. While this was sad for
America, I have to play the multicultural game, at least
defensively, or I and my family and kin will lose out. It is what
every ethnic group except, in the main, European-Americans, does
these days. European-Americans are late to the game, but
the many instances in which European-Americans are discriminated
against in education, the job market and the criminal justice
systemincluding various lies spread about me and the organizations
to which I belongshould be a wake-up call. [Virginia
Abernethy, Letter to the Editor, Washington Times, September 30,
There is no sign Dr. Abernethys
association with Prop. 200 has decreased its support.
• BACK TO TOP • •
| L E T T E R S
F R O M R E A D E R S
SirI read the October cover
story about Chicago policing with great interest for several reasons.
First, it is always good to get the police perspective on our
cowardly leaders. Even more interesting to me, though,
was to read about routine police practices in hard-bitten areas
with many blacks.
I think the police have one of
the most difficult and thankless jobs in America. Everyone suffers
from the folly of multi-racialism, but white policemen probably
suffer more than anyone. The author of the article rightly challenges
critics of the police to have a go at dealing directly with Americas
problem people. I suspect Senator Kennedy himself
would have the liberalism knocked out of him if he had to make
a living as a Chicago police officer.
George Pogue, Appleton, Wisc.
SirI was glad to be able
to visit your web page and see for myself the video clip that
got the Chicago policemen in trouble. The officers are pretty
rough with the suspect, and I can see why someone who saw the
video without an explanation would think the police were unnecessarily
Context, of course, is everything,
and the media do not hesitate to ignore context if this means
whites can be made to look bad. I remember when I first saw the
video of the beating of Rodney King, I could not imagine a justification
for such treatment, but the context explained the officers
actions. As the author of your article points out, the first jurywhich
did not have the memory of Americas worst-ever race riots
looming over its verdictstudied the context and acquitted
the officers. I pray that Officer Vander Meys jury will
likewise attend to the evidence impartially and reach a just verdict.
Anne Grimes, North Caldwell, N.J.
should be done of the increasing number of road rage
incidents between drivers of differing racial/ethnic groups. Whites
do not like loud, pounding rap music or the crazy driving habits
seemingly characteristic of other cultures and races. This kind
of driving results in higher accident rates among non-whites,
but also provokes more road rage. Non-whites may also dislike
interacting with us, and this could trigger aggressive driving.
I would be willing to bet there is a direct relationship between
the levels of diversity in an area, and levels of
accidents and road rage incidents.
Sidney Secular, Silver Spring,
SirThe image of the Willie
Horton ad you used in the review of Samuel Franciss Ethnopolitics
in the October issue is erroneous. It is the version of the ad
produced by filmmaker Michael Moore, not the one produced by the
George H. W. Bush campaign.
The Moore version featured revolving
turnstyles and the line, Willie Horton released, then kills
again. The actual ad as it aired said that Willie Horton
raped again while out on release; he did not kill. There
were two Willie Horton commercials produced during the 1988 presidential
campaign, one about the revolving door prison system of Massachusetts,
the other about Mr. Horton himself. Michael Moore conflated them
into one commercial and then added his own overlay about Horton
being released to kill again in one of his exercises
in creative license. The image appears in early versions of Bowling
for Columbine, and eventually made its way to the Internet.
SirSamuel Francis need not
be so pessimistic about the Stupid Party. Lust for
power is the strongest emotion a politician feels. The effect
of race on the electoral calculus will only become clearer, and
even the stupidest of the stupid will start appealing to whites.
Not to do so would be evidence of principles, of which the Republicans
James Carmichael, Hoboken, N.J.
SirIt might interest you
to know that there has been some Internet traffic critical of
AR for publishing a favorable review of Bernard Goldbergs
book Arrogance in last months issue. The complaint
was no more and no less than the fact that although the book may
make useful arguments, the author is Jewish. I believe the activities
of Jews, like those of any group, are fair game for investigation
and criticism. However, to dismiss an authorand one who
writes usefully about some aspect of our racial plightsimply
because he is a Jew is a sad example of closed minds at work.
The word prejudice is so overused I thought I had
stricken it from my vocabulary. On this occasion I am inclined
to dust it off and use it.
Silvie Tourneau, Charleston, S.C.
is just the kind of trash that puts white people
everywhere to shame. Its ignorant articles are a slap
in the face to the ongoing struggle for justice and human dignity.
It makes me ill to read the tired old racist ranting of your bigot
The blacks and immigrants
are taking over message is so irrelevant and ridiculous
in these times and people just dont want to hear it anymore.
You should come out of fantasyland and start asking yourself what
you can do to make life better like the rest of us. Its
hard enough out there without this kind of hateful garbage being
Please stop embarrassing white
people like me, and find a new job.
• BACK TO TOP • •